![]()
I love Flickr. It’s quite possibly my favourite website. Here’s how deep I’m in there:
- flickr.com is my homepage in multiple browsers on multiple computers.
- I have a pro account with 229 items (still a tiny number by some standards).
- I run a group called Pigeons & Peacocks, which is mainly work-related but a lot of fun.
- I regularly check my stats to see how many people have viewed my images.
- It totally makes my day when someone ‘faves’ my work (i.e. marks one of my images as a favourite) or leaves a comment.
But sometimes I’m mystified by the stuff that becomes popular on Flickr.
Flickr has a feature called ‘interestingness‘, a secret algorithm that ranks images from the millions uploaded every day based on (among other factors) the number of times they are viewed, and the number of times they are ‘faved’ or commented on. I browse ‘interesting’ photos a lot, and have unearthed some fantastic images, many of which have made it into my favourites. Today I stumbled upon this one, by a user called ‘Jerri Johnson (So little time, sorry!)’. It irked me a little.
For me, it’s a really phoney image. It started as unremarkable, and by applying some filters and colour tweaks and watermarking in Photoshop it just got gaudy. But some people like this stuff - HDR photography, which deliberately exaggerates colours to an unreal degree, is all the rage at the moment. HDR-type images (or bad approximations of the style) appear regularly in Flickr’s ‘most interesting’ lists.
Anyway, back to that image - ‘The House of Lifesavers’. It has actually only been viewed 167 times, fewer times than my image of the Bullet girls. However, it has been ‘faved’ 47 times, and has a whole page of comments. Jerri has 881 contacts, and that’s a lot of people being notified when she posts an image, so this isn’t surprising.
But the comments list is a bit suspicious: I can see a dozen people who have commented multiple times, often with invitations to many different groups, with names like ‘The Golden Touch‘. The image has also been invited to some of the same groups multiple times, often by groups that have a policy requiring people who submit images to nominate one or more images by different users.
There’s obviously a bit of sour groups grapes here, since to my knowledge none of my photos has ever made it into the most interesting charts. However it’s clear that some users with a relatively small circle of proactive contacts can push certain images up the interesting scale by effectively fave- and comment-spamming. And I think Flickr’s interestingness algorithm should protect against this, if it doesn’t already. Sure, there’s no accounting for taste, but come on. Come on.