Here's a mystery that has yet to be solved. How come a photo that has a lot of views, comments and FAVs gets totally ignored by the Magic Photo Monkeys yet another photo that gets maybe 3 FAVs winds up on the Popular Page almost instantly? Riddle me this, Batman...How does a less popular photo make it to the PP over a more popular one?
While we're waiting for an answer, let's all post a picture that was loved by our followers, but overlooked by the Magic Photo Monkeys.
Here's one of mine. 15 FAVs, but no PP. The Monkeys were no doubt passed out at the local pub at the time.
Haven't a clue how the monkeys work. I have some of mine up with only 3 favs. I think it is because it is a certain percentage of the comments. When my faves are 1/3 to 1/2 of my comments, my photo MAY make it to the PP. Less then that and it won't and it will disappear off the PP.
None of mine have made PP (sniff tear WAIL) :( Darn magic photo monkeys.. BUT how that didn't make it to the PP @cromwell is WAY beyond me! That is an awesome photo!!!!
The magic monkeys are indeed a mystery. I'm pretty sure part of it has to do with the length of time one has been on 365- a formula which allows newcomers without huge follower bases yet to make the PP sometimes. Other than that I haven't a clue. I've only made the PP a handful of times so I'm certainly no expert!
Ahh, this site's version of Flickr's much-maligned 'interestingness' formula.
The problem with determining 'good' photographs automatically is, of course, that a computer can't determine an amazing photograph from an appalling one given just the photograph itself. These decisions must be made on metrics which are available for the computer to analyse.
If I was writing the formula (and let me hasten to add I didn't, nor have any evidence to support any of the following claims other than a general knowledge of analytics) I would probably start by considering:
1. The number of views/favs ratio. A photo with 5 views and 5 favs is probably a better photo than one with 2000 views and 5 favs.
2. The number of views/comments ratio -- same reasoning.
3. The number of comments/favs ratio -- if someone goes to the trouble of commenting, but doesn't also fav the image, that might mean that the image is interesting, or that the photographer has asked for opinions, but not necessarily that the photo is 'worthy' of PP.
4. The number of favs or comments by people who don't follow the photographer -- people are more likely to comment or fav a shot by someone they follow -- if they do so on a photo by someone they don't follow, it indicates they had to find the photo (seeing it on the latest uploads page, linked on a discussion thread, etc.) and might have more merit.
Analysing all the photos uploaded in the day and ranking them by those criteria (weighted appropriately, probably by trial and error) would get you a system that would identify photos that might be likely to be better than average.
Of course, there's a lot more work that could be done, for example, did the views come from the site or off the site -- if all the views are referrals from Facebook or Twitter that probably means that the photographer promoted it on those networks -- nothing wrong with that, but you might choose to positively (or negatively) adjust the weighting accordingly. The amount of metrics that could be measured and taken into account are virtually limitless, and will highlight a different but probably-perfectly-valid set of 'great' photos. And that's before we start doing basic image analysis on sharpness, following the rule of thirds, etc. (I very strongly doubt this site or Flickr does that, by the way).
And don't forget, your photos are being considered against a moving target -- everybody else's photos. You can upload an amazing photo, but if you're unlucky enough that 20 other people chose that day to take the best photo of their lives, then you're probably out of luck. If you upload a better than average photo on a day when everyone else was feeling fed up, you might get a nice surprise!
If I had to guess, and it would be a total guess, I would think that the number of views and comments compared to the number of favs is too high -- if I was writing an algorithm, a photo with 51 comments and 15 favs would probably rank lower than a photo with 15 comments and 15 favs.
The best thing to do is not to worry about it too much -- if you get on PP then great, and if you don't, it's probably just because another computer has screwed up!
I was one of those 3 faves on there once. It made my day to get up there as it seemed like a high reaching goal for me. It was near the beginning of the year and I was pretty new at the project. I loved your above shot and realized that I hadn't faved it yet. Maybe it's not too late...:)
I've never had a pop photo, but I'm not nearly as creative as Crom ;) I do analytics and SEO for a living, and relavence formulas are highly subjective. This formula could probably use a revisit.
@abirkill -- Very interesting analysis, Alexis. So, your assuming that there is no human equation behind the photo monkeys picks, that it is all done selectively by computer? You may be correct, but I wonder. it appears to me that there is a distinctive taste in the choosing of the PP photos. The subject matter is decidedly the same and predictable all of the time. I couldn't even calculate how many insect and flower shots get up there daily. Now you could argue that maybe the majority of 365 take a LOT of insect and flower shots, but I would counter argue that just as many take portrait shots, yet, maybe only 1% of portrait photos ever get up in the PP. A computer couldn't differentiate between the subject matter of photos. That leads me to believe there must be someone (or more than one)
person who makes the pick.
Anyway, let's see those photos that man or machine ignored. Post 'em if you got 'em.
@abirkill is it naive to think that once an algorithm identifies statistically "good" photos, a human has final input to try to make sure there is a variety of subject matter on the pp, as well as a variety of 365ers from differing points in their projects? I also think the monkeys intervene if someone like you, dear Cromwell or Alex, have insanely popular photos with 80some or more favs. Then you're put in the corner for a while to let others play in the sandbox. I faved this photo,Crom, when I first saw it. Tis a pp mystery.
@cromwell I am relatively new to 365 and relatively new to photography in general. I have been learning the ropes around the website, and seeing what people strive for. I realize everyone seeks different things, and the PP page seems to be what some strive for.
The monkeys serve their own personal higher math power, known to none, except for one.
Oh, and one time I had a 3 Fav photo on popular page and someone, who doesn't follow me, took the time to comment to tell me they didn't get my photo or understand why it made pop page. I sort of had to agree, lol.
@cameronknowlton I don't personally see much to say the formula needs revisiting. A formula should be re-engineered if it is constantly picking bad data (photos, in this case), or if people have learnt how to game it.
While it would be nice to have a formula that always picked my photos, when I go to PP it's very rare for me to find a photograph that doesn't have some aspect of it that impresses me. They might not be my *personal* top 20 of the day, but then my personal top 20 of the day is unlikely to be someone else's top 20 of the day -- this is, at the end of the day, entirely subjective.
I suspect that if you got everyone to view all the photos uploaded in a day and pick the top 100, most people would pick most of the photos that appear in PP in their top 100. If so, the algorithm is doing pretty well.
Flickr's algorithm was changed earlier this year because it was constantly picking 'bad' photos for their 'explore' section (equivalent of PP but even harder and more mysterious to get into!). My favourite example of a photo that made Explore was this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/trudeaumania/7190316706/
I don't see that kind of photograph (or anything like) making it into PP on this site.
I thought this one would and it did build favs pretty quickly ....which seems to be part if it too...how fast the favs collect. Maybe I just loved this mine because shooting flying gulls on a cloudy Jan. day in a wal mart parking lot was not easy. I had so much fu n seeing the giant flock of seagulls there though and loved how everyone reacted to them.
I'm also convinced that it's how fast they get the views/comments/favs. I've had some really nice pictures never make it up even though they have the numbers to back it up. It's just that it takes my followers longer to view/comment/fav it up. If those things happen quickly after a picture is posted, it may go up. I was certain this one would make it, but no.
@abirkill, these kind of relavence formulas are by nature initially designed as a course evaluation. The trick is to adjust the weights of each factor (and often incorporate additional factors) to get closer to original intent. The current formulas, especially as evidenced within one's own 'Top' 24 hour/7 day/all time evaluations, show the current formula to be young and rough. We can look forward to improvements over time.
@rockinrobyn@cromwell I personally doubt there is human intervention, at least on a regular basis. That's not how I would do it if I was writing the site. There probably is the ability for certain 'administrators' to remove a photo if it is unsuitable.
Generally I find that insect and flower shots tend to gather more comments and favs than other types of shot on here, so I'm not surprised that an automated algorithm would promote more of them to PP. Indeed, if there was a human element, I would expect it to try and make PP more balanced in subject nature, even while choosing photographs that are not to the administrator's taste (I would be able to choose a 'good' flower shot even though flower shots are not something that particularly interest me).
I would not be surprised if the automated system did mark down members based on how recently they've had a photo in PP, to stop it being filled with photos by the same 20 semi-professional photographers! This would certainly be easy to implement.
The true test to determine if a system is fully automated or not is for 20 members with large follower counts to upload ridiculously cute pictures of cats or dogs on the same day -- if PP the next day has nothing but these photos in it, we can be sure there is no human interaction ;)
I also suspect the Top 20 chart is automatically generated using the same algorithm -- I had a photo that was in the chart for two weeks, and I would have expected it to be filtered out in the second week if there was manual intervention (indeed, I would have preferred it, as it would have allowed someone else to get a spot).
As I say, this is all (very uneducated) guesswork on my part.
@abirkill and then of course, there are the people that comment that the photo is a fav but forget to actually press the fav button. I get comment alerts on my phone and was reading the comments for the photo I uploaded earlier today. There were more "fav" comments than actual favs, so I assume a couple people had an oops moment. LOL no big deal. The pic won't make top 20 anyway.
Cromwell and many others who have commented, just know that you are on MY Popular Page EVERY day! I really didn't even know I had photos on the PP the first year and in Feb '12 someone mentioned that I had 3 on at one time. I do now check it out if I have a photo I really like, but how do you even tell?! I look at my followers/followee's photos and that is terrific for me. I don't have time to look at ALL the TREMENDOUS photos and I don't feel like I am missing out.
I interviewed the founder Ross for a newspaper story and he swears it's a computer algorithm that is designed to reward improvement. Honestly, how could he look at all the photos posted on here? In my year and a half here, I've noticed that alot of faves in early comments can have an effect, but then found things on the PP that I posted two days earlier when one additional fave must have been the push. It's not a conspiracy folks, it's just a website for people to record a year of their life, meet other like minded people and hopefully improve their skills.
I don't get that either, Cromwell. A few of mine have made the pp with the 3 favs & under 50 views when in comparsion the bigger numbers should make it there first. I don't worry about the pp but it is a little buzz when you see one of your pictures there. When I started this project I never imagined my shots would be good enough for that page or the top 20. The way the cookie crumbles, I guess
@lauriehiggins -- Indeed, Laurie, but this does make for a spirited debate. I do think there is room for improvement though. Let's face, putting aside the omissions for a moment, those one inch squares hardly do justice to ANY of the photos displayed there justice for instance. There must be a better way to format that page.
Whilst I am sure there is a formula that helps the Magic Monkeys do their picking, I am of the belief that 'ace' members do seem to have more of a showing in the lowered numberd fav's within the PP. In saying that I still believe it was Elvis on the grassy knoll in Dallas.
@bdb3471 Thanks for making me laugh, Brian! Actually my kids joined 365 - never became ACE members and both ended up on the pop page at least once. I think my son made it there twice. And neither of them lasted a month on 365. So go figure.
@cromwell@abirkill the one point I haven't seen here is time. Having seen some shots with low fav's on the pp and then commented on some I follow with amazing photos that haven't made the pp despite higher # of favs I came to the conclusion that it is the number of comments and fav received in a short time span?? That is the only way I can explain how some shots make it to pp over others. I do think the magic monkey has some quirks ( loves animals) and is a machine. Has anyone asked Ross? Or is that a question dealt with silence or deleted membership?
Oh and Alexis - that flicker explore photo made me happy to not have a Flickr account at this time, pp 365 never fails to amaze me with awe.
This is on my own private PP. Has taken me all year to find a nice web....and everyother person is posting webs this week!!
I think it is a computer generated algorythm of some sort, views related to comments, related to Favs, as I rarely get more than 30 comments, but have had a few photos on the PP
You're on the PP today Crom!!
@onie -- Yes, which throws a kink in one of the theories that time is a factor in the computer picking a shot for the PP. My shot is two days old and just got on it an hour ago.
I have had photos on the PP for what seemed like 5 minutes, and others for 3 days. I think if it gets there, and that generates more views and comments, then it stays a bit longer. It will probably stay a bit of a mystery. I shall keep enjoying seeing the odd one of mine there as the top 20 is waaaay out of my reach with the amount of views and comments I get. I like what I post...that's the main thing!!
I think this formula is the best kept secret and should remain that way.
I also think that I can also conclude that Cromwell is not likely to be giving me a FAV for my insects or flowers in the near future but I will still be looking for it Cromwell :)
I have just looked at the PP page and notice that there seems to be a fair mix of topics on there including Cromwells gorgeous photo of seance on a wet afternoon which has 15 Favs but seems to have achieved that magical proportion of 50% comments to views so maybe this is the difference Cromwell from the above photo which achieved something like 150 odd views but only 50 comments (from memory). What I think is that people will give a FAV if they really admire it but people will comment on a photo more if it is to their taste and if you don't like flowers you are less likely to comment on flowers, if you don't like architecture you are less likely to comment on it unless it really stands out to you. Anyhow I love the PP page and usually find most of the photos in the top 20 are very admirable even when not topics close to my heart. Just my two penneth and am enjoying the discussion.
In my 1st year I was on the PP reasonably frequently but since I've started my 2nd year I've not been near :( Doesn't really bother me except for the fact that I think my photos are getting better now but I do seem to be getting less views?!?
Anyway below is one of mine that got 86 views, 27 comments & 6 favs I thought it was good enough!
I was shocked to even be on the PP list, didnt even know until someone congratulated me and I had two PP photos the same week? I dont get the process either? I think it's good to just do what you love and who cares if you are on the PP. Everyone has a different 'eye' for what they like in photography. I think this site is a great learning and encouraging place to grow. Believe me I have been on some sites where they just bash and tare you down for just the littlest flaw in your photo…so who cares about PP…just be encouraged you are doing something you love.
@m9f9l Absolutely, that was your problem. No baby. You've got the bird, the cat, the flower, the spider, the sunset, even the moon, what more does a monkey want? Actually p'raps it's the frog that's lacking ;-)
@cromwell I know the secret, but it's for my eyes only. I have one photo on the PP right now with only a few fav's. It hasn't got many views either as it's b&w and architecture, not a flower or sunset in sight. When the photo got 4(!) favs out of 6(!) comments I checked the PP and there it was. So fav/comment ratio is definitely part of the equation. Then it drifted off the PP after a day , until it unexpectedly, of no apparent reason, reappeared on the PP today. Beats me.
Don't know Cromwell, @houdiniem never seems to make PP, even getting 21 favs isn;t good enough, me thinks the magic monkies only pick cliched safe shit!
I really had high hopes for this one - 38 views, 24 comments, 9 favs
On the other hand, I had 2 spider webs on PP with only 3-4 favs and they cannot compare to this one by any chance... I guess monkeys love spider webs ;)
I understand that you stand a better chance of the PP if you get rid of the dead wood and prune your followers list. I want to know if someone who disappears reappears, so that's me eliminated.
I stopped looking at the popular page sometime go. I do tend to pick up new people whose work interests me from the 'latest' page.
I do find some of the work on here to be technically good, but rather formularised, to the point that it has no soul. I post stuff that interests me, it's what the project is for!
@daffodill -- It is my understanding that you can't delete anyone who follows you. You can only delete those who you are following. Is there a way of pruning your followers list that I'm unaware of?
I've said this before and I'll say it again: I never expect any of my photos to show up on the PP. Either because I'm a realist or because I don't give myself enough credit (matter of opinion). I'm just happy to get more than 3 comments on the stuff I post even when most of the time it seems to be an I-scratch-your-back-if-you- scratch-mine type of deal. I attribute this to comment fatigue on the part of some of my followers (I have it, too); to the fact that lots of people on my list of followers are no longer active in the project, and to the not- exactly-stellar quality of my photos. I can live with that. I have made the PP about 9 times in the year I've been here (almost done, yeay!) but I hadn't been there since March. Now suddenly, I've made it twice in a week with flower pics that got less than 4 Favs each. Perhaps Cromwell is referring to me in his comment. @cromwell
The irony of the Views / Favs ratio (if it exists) is sharing a post to off-site locations. I share my posts via Twitter, and that nets me usually around 15-20 views instantly. But no comments or favs on this site. So I guess we're only supposed to show the photo to the people that will fav it. Seems a bit counter-intuitive.
I stopped trying to figure out the PP and T20 some time ago; it is what it is. I am thrilled when one of mine shows up and very thankful to anyone that comments and faves! My personal goal with 365 is to become a better photographer, and feedback in the form of comments and "faves" is a big part of that process. I do agree with @losthorizon , sometimes I get on a streak and have several on the PP at once but would rather be limited to only one at a time so there is room for others. The New Faces page has the same issue; it would be great to limit it to one shot per person at a time.
Great shot Cromwell! Absolutely love it! About the PP formula - go figure! It certainly has room for improvement...
This never made it to PP with 17 Favs, but I'm glad to show it off here :)
@michaelelliott I think we are the Pic Monkeys!!! Whilst I am sure that the formula is mathematical I think that we are the Pic Monkeys that everyone is talking about. It is our taste, our comments and our Fav's that the alogarhythms (can't even spell it) register. Therefore if their is a bias for dogs or sunsets or flowers or babies I think it is created by our votes and comments as a whole. Likewise if masses of us support one photographer and they get more photos on the PP page. Am so enjoying this discussion everyone.
@lwain - but there are gremlins in the works too called the PP Handcuffs. If you make PP too many times within a certain period of time, you get the cuffs slapped on tight. That's another reason why after making PP and you quickly get another super pics with lots of favs it often won't make it. I've been fortunate enough to make PP more times than I can count and so not sour grapes, but I'm smart enough to know its all BS and stopped looking at it long ago. Exhibit A look at all the marvelous pics here!!! We should start a People' Pop Page.
I have reached the point where I don't care about any of that anymore. I've made the PP many times in the past, and the Top 20 about 5 times. My photos, I feel, are better now than they were then, but I know that they will not "go anywhere" on 365 anymore because I simply don't comment as much as I used to. The social aspect of this site very much plays into the pp and top20. I'm very happy with my photos though, and most weeks don't even look at the PP anymore. I used to be obsessed, now I feel so much calmer about the whole thing. :-D I'm not saying to slow down or don't be concerned about those popularity contests; I am sure that they played a big role in my photography education/development/experimentation.
I love reading this discussion and all the other ones on the topic but I've personally never cared much about the PP myself. I might occasionally look at it but I usually stick to new faces and latest. I could make the PP and I wouldn't even know it :-P
Well I don't think anyone but me even looks at most of my pics, forget about PP so I'll just post what was my I think most popular...it did get on the 'new faces' for like an hour even lol.
No idea how the PP works and have never had a photo on it, nor would I expect to when I compare my photos with the amazing ones that show up on it. I do, however, love going to the PP to be stunned by everyones talent and creativity imagination and vision. I love looking at shots and thinking, 'wow, that is truly awesome'. So as long as that keeps happening, I will be one happy 365 member.
Erm... I have no idea how to attach a picture in here. I thought this would make it to PP. It didn't. Barely any comments even. Boo. But I love it!!! :D http://365project.org/suomi/365/2012-10
Ah crap. Well there it is! Sure do wish computers had a "this is what I'm going to do when you do that" button so that I wouldn't have to post these dumb replies. ....... urg
@cromwell@espyetta@abirkill@sjodell@sassik@boogie@suomi I love this thread (and similar ones in the past) as there are always such awesome photos on it. Well done, all great shots and worthy of praise. I must admit that I don't even look at the PP anymore. Funny as I was always looking at it in my first year. I tend to agree with @sjodell that my shots are getting better but they get way less attention. Then again I'm sure that's because I have less time for the site, so it's all fair!! Anyway, here is one of my favourites
52 views, 13 comments and 4 favs
@shirljess I remember. I am still honored that this image has touched so many people. And it was my first real "popular" photo. It changed the direction of my project.
And yes, I have found a few new FAVs from this thread as well!
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
The problem with determining 'good' photographs automatically is, of course, that a computer can't determine an amazing photograph from an appalling one given just the photograph itself. These decisions must be made on metrics which are available for the computer to analyse.
If I was writing the formula (and let me hasten to add I didn't, nor have any evidence to support any of the following claims other than a general knowledge of analytics) I would probably start by considering:
1. The number of views/favs ratio. A photo with 5 views and 5 favs is probably a better photo than one with 2000 views and 5 favs.
2. The number of views/comments ratio -- same reasoning.
3. The number of comments/favs ratio -- if someone goes to the trouble of commenting, but doesn't also fav the image, that might mean that the image is interesting, or that the photographer has asked for opinions, but not necessarily that the photo is 'worthy' of PP.
4. The number of favs or comments by people who don't follow the photographer -- people are more likely to comment or fav a shot by someone they follow -- if they do so on a photo by someone they don't follow, it indicates they had to find the photo (seeing it on the latest uploads page, linked on a discussion thread, etc.) and might have more merit.
Analysing all the photos uploaded in the day and ranking them by those criteria (weighted appropriately, probably by trial and error) would get you a system that would identify photos that might be likely to be better than average.
Of course, there's a lot more work that could be done, for example, did the views come from the site or off the site -- if all the views are referrals from Facebook or Twitter that probably means that the photographer promoted it on those networks -- nothing wrong with that, but you might choose to positively (or negatively) adjust the weighting accordingly. The amount of metrics that could be measured and taken into account are virtually limitless, and will highlight a different but probably-perfectly-valid set of 'great' photos. And that's before we start doing basic image analysis on sharpness, following the rule of thirds, etc. (I very strongly doubt this site or Flickr does that, by the way).
And don't forget, your photos are being considered against a moving target -- everybody else's photos. You can upload an amazing photo, but if you're unlucky enough that 20 other people chose that day to take the best photo of their lives, then you're probably out of luck. If you upload a better than average photo on a day when everyone else was feeling fed up, you might get a nice surprise!
If I had to guess, and it would be a total guess, I would think that the number of views and comments compared to the number of favs is too high -- if I was writing an algorithm, a photo with 51 comments and 15 favs would probably rank lower than a photo with 15 comments and 15 favs.
The best thing to do is not to worry about it too much -- if you get on PP then great, and if you don't, it's probably just because another computer has screwed up!
person who makes the pick.
Anyway, let's see those photos that man or machine ignored. Post 'em if you got 'em.
The monkeys serve their own personal higher math power, known to none, except for one.
I
While it would be nice to have a formula that always picked my photos, when I go to PP it's very rare for me to find a photograph that doesn't have some aspect of it that impresses me. They might not be my *personal* top 20 of the day, but then my personal top 20 of the day is unlikely to be someone else's top 20 of the day -- this is, at the end of the day, entirely subjective.
I suspect that if you got everyone to view all the photos uploaded in a day and pick the top 100, most people would pick most of the photos that appear in PP in their top 100. If so, the algorithm is doing pretty well.
Flickr's algorithm was changed earlier this year because it was constantly picking 'bad' photos for their 'explore' section (equivalent of PP but even harder and more mysterious to get into!). My favourite example of a photo that made Explore was this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/trudeaumania/7190316706/
I don't see that kind of photograph (or anything like) making it into PP on this site.
Generally I find that insect and flower shots tend to gather more comments and favs than other types of shot on here, so I'm not surprised that an automated algorithm would promote more of them to PP. Indeed, if there was a human element, I would expect it to try and make PP more balanced in subject nature, even while choosing photographs that are not to the administrator's taste (I would be able to choose a 'good' flower shot even though flower shots are not something that particularly interest me).
I would not be surprised if the automated system did mark down members based on how recently they've had a photo in PP, to stop it being filled with photos by the same 20 semi-professional photographers! This would certainly be easy to implement.
The true test to determine if a system is fully automated or not is for 20 members with large follower counts to upload ridiculously cute pictures of cats or dogs on the same day -- if PP the next day has nothing but these photos in it, we can be sure there is no human interaction ;)
I also suspect the Top 20 chart is automatically generated using the same algorithm -- I had a photo that was in the chart for two weeks, and I would have expected it to be filtered out in the second week if there was manual intervention (indeed, I would have preferred it, as it would have allowed someone else to get a spot).
As I say, this is all (very uneducated) guesswork on my part.
Cromwell and many others who have commented, just know that you are on MY Popular Page EVERY day! I really didn't even know I had photos on the PP the first year and in Feb '12 someone mentioned that I had 3 on at one time. I do now check it out if I have a photo I really like, but how do you even tell?! I look at my followers/followee's photos and that is terrific for me. I don't have time to look at ALL the TREMENDOUS photos and I don't feel like I am missing out.
Oh and Alexis - that flicker explore photo made me happy to not have a Flickr account at this time, pp 365 never fails to amaze me with awe.
Equally, I have some photos that made PP but didn't make Flickr's Explore page :)
I think it is a computer generated algorythm of some sort, views related to comments, related to Favs, as I rarely get more than 30 comments, but have had a few photos on the PP
You're on the PP today Crom!!
I also think that I can also conclude that Cromwell is not likely to be giving me a FAV for my insects or flowers in the near future but I will still be looking for it Cromwell :)
I have just looked at the PP page and notice that there seems to be a fair mix of topics on there including Cromwells gorgeous photo of seance on a wet afternoon which has 15 Favs but seems to have achieved that magical proportion of 50% comments to views so maybe this is the difference Cromwell from the above photo which achieved something like 150 odd views but only 50 comments (from memory). What I think is that people will give a FAV if they really admire it but people will comment on a photo more if it is to their taste and if you don't like flowers you are less likely to comment on flowers, if you don't like architecture you are less likely to comment on it unless it really stands out to you. Anyhow I love the PP page and usually find most of the photos in the top 20 are very admirable even when not topics close to my heart. Just my two penneth and am enjoying the discussion.
Anyway below is one of mine that got 86 views, 27 comments & 6 favs I thought it was good enough!
I had thought this might make it (91 views. 40 comments, 5 favs) but alas no. It was good fun, though.
On the other hand, I had 2 spider webs on PP with only 3-4 favs and they cannot compare to this one by any chance... I guess monkeys love spider webs ;)
I stopped looking at the popular page sometime go. I do tend to pick up new people whose work interests me from the 'latest' page.
I do find some of the work on here to be technically good, but rather formularised, to the point that it has no soul. I post stuff that interests me, it's what the project is for!
This never made it to PP with 17 Favs, but I'm glad to show it off here :)
http://365project.org/suomi/365/2012-10
You pasted the link for your entire month.
Here's the link anyways...
52 views, 13 comments and 4 favs
And yes, I have found a few new FAVs from this thread as well!