Tom C wrote: >Strange. Many individual photos are untitled. Maybe it's because they're >in folder of a particular name, like Alaska. > > > >Tom C. > > > > The photo of mine that has gotten the most hits has the names of the people in it as it's title.
Alfred Butts is one of them. (The inventor of Scrabble) It is far from the "best" photo I've shown on the site. ann > > >>From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation >>Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:47:56 -0500 >> >>Like some said, it can be due to search engines picking up on the >>title. I've also found that the first shot in a folder gets more >>views than any other. Don't know why. Pics that make it into the >>"highest rated" gallery get a lot of hits. >>Paul >>On Feb 23, 2007, at 7:34 PM, Tom C wrote: >> >> >> >>>No of course not. :-) Each photo displayed on photo.net has a >>>number of >>>times viewed field, that they suppposedly maintain. >>> >>>The PESO I displayed yesterday now has a count of 37, which seems >>>reasonable. But 700+ on photos that have no value to anyone but >>>myself, is >>>weird. >>> >>>Tom C. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>Subject: Re: Photo.net Observation >>>>Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:26:14 -0800 (PST) >>>> >>>>I gather you have purchased search words to "get" people to look at >>>>your photos. <LOL> >>>>I went through that, and about $300 a month, for a year and a half >>>>before it sank in that I wasn't making a profit. Actually, my wife >>>>was >>>>good enough to point it out. >>>>Price/hit kept going up and my 'grandfathered in' lower price just >>>>didn't get them enough attention. >>>>OST, you're possibly not talking about website hits.(?) >>>> >>>>Jack >>>>--- Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>When looking at the Number of Times Viewed statistic for some of my >>>>>photos, >>>>>I'm surprised. Many photos that are of no interest to anyone other >>>>>than >>>>>family or friends, have no title, and are mere snapshots, are >>>>>showing >>>>>up as >>>>>having been viewed 700+ times. That seems quite high to me. >>>>> >>>>>I can understand it if it was a photo I asked for a critique on, or >>>>>if it >>>>>was one I posted as a PESO, but the ones in question are not. >>>>> >>>>>I'm wondering if some sort of automated crawler exists that could be >>>>>inflating the numbers. The images I'm referring to have been out >>>>>there >>>>>about two years. I can undertsand that number of hits if random >>>>>individuals >>>>>came across the gallery and clicked on ones they liked. But I can't >>>>>believe >>>>>700+ random individuals would click on those I've described. >>>>> >>>>>Any ideas? >>>>> >>>>>Tom C. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>[email protected] >>>>>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>__________________________________________________ >>>>Do You Yahoo!? >>>>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >>>>http://mail.yahoo.com >>>> >>>>-- >>>>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>[email protected] >>>>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> >>> >>>-- >>>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>[email protected] >>>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >>-- >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>[email protected] >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> > > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
