At the top of your Flickr account, should you have one, is a count of the number of “views” you’ve had. This, I believe, counts the number of times your photos have been loaded up on their own pages on Flickr and doesn’t count remote hosting (such as when I post to this blog) or viewing in RSS feeds. Last Monday my views passed 100,000. To put this in some perspective, most of the other Flickr users I’ve asked (which, to be honest, is about four) have between 1,000 and 6,000 views. I was rather chuffed.
A week later I had 102,000 views. That’s two thousand in a week. That’s actually quite a lot. I got a bit suspicious.
There are a number of explanations for this.
1) I’m a shockingly popular and everyone loves my photos. Actually I’ve got a fairly average rep for someone who’s been on Flickr for two years. 186 people have me as a contact and my photos get between 5 and 20 views in their first day or so of being uploaded. I’ve also been concentrating on the Birmingham photo scene a lot this year and don’t post to themed or popular groups that much. I might have a tangible rep within my niche but I’m no Laura Kicey. So that’s not the answer.
2) I’m a Pool Tart. Check this guy’s photo out. It’s a pretty good photo and its owner is somewhat proud that it’s been viewed 9,250 times. But look down the sidebar at how many groups he’s submitted it to. I don’t do this, partly because Flickr make it quite longwinded to spam the groups and partly because it really fucking annoys me when people spam groups I administer. So that’s not the answer.
3) I’m a Tag Whore. Generally I like to tag my photos properly. Some people don’t. Like this cock who has tagged his stupid Flickr Badge with seemingly every word in the dictionary and then some. I found this because he’d used one of our deliberately obscure Birmingham Flickrmeet tags, jqfm2006. The prick. By polluting the tag system he’s gathered 1,970 views for this “photo”. Needless to say I don’t do this, so that’s not the answer.
4) The hits are coming from somewhere else and have nothing to do with my activities on Flickr. I think this is the answer.
Here’s a mirror of my Most Viewed Photos page (you can’t see it on Flickr itself unless you’re me). You’ll hopefully notice this doesn’t have many of my “better” photos and bears no relation to my personal Top 100, something that has often bugged me. Number one is the Working Gloves montage with 2050 views which gave me an enormous clue. The related Working Gloves blog post on this site is one of my main Google honeypots, gathering (until I closed comments on old posts) 67 messages from Pakistani glove exporters who thought I was a shop which in turn got it indexed as the prime directory for Pakistani glove exporters, so the Flickr views are probably coming from here. Down at number nine is Polysics – Fumi, taken at their Barfly gig last November (and, I should add, one I’m quite proud of). Out of curiosity I Googled polysics photo and there it is at number three. Same goes for (sigh…) Monkey Penis.
Nuff said.
So having made stats watching utterly pointless for my blog Google has fucked up my Flickr stats as well, which isn’t that surprising given how much I link to my Flickr stream from here. It’s kinda ironic that while half the world is scrambling by means fair or foul to get up the Google tree here I am with PageRank of 6 (which in turn has given my Flickr stream a PR of 5) and it’s a mild irritant.
In some ways it’s nice to be this visible but in others it’s a bit of a pain. I’m sure a significant number of valued long-term readers came here via a random Google search but they only add up to a few dozen. The hundreds of thousands of others mostly come here by mistake and take the blog completely out of context and I could do without them. The reason I closed comments on all my older posts wasn’t because of spam (touch wood that’s reasonably under control right now) but because idiots who couldn’t read were leaving comments that showed off their inability to use a keyboard and it was getting boring. That said, I’m not ready to enter the gated community environment of LiveJournal or Vox or to strip down my RSS feed and stop search engines indexing me. I’m kinda stuck in the middle ground.
Moan over.
Do RSS readers attempt to download the images contained in feeds? Maybe that might cause it.
Pardon me if I’ve just had a “Durrrrrr” moment
I think this is a very good analysis of why one should not pay too much attention to Flickr’s statistics. For the record, after 10 months I have reached 23,000 and the rate of increase does appear to be accelerating from a very slow beginning. I love your expressions “pool tart” and “tag whore”. I am not interested in being either of them for much the same reason you cite, entering all those pools or tags simply takes too much time, something I would rather use to view my contact’s photos.
What seems to be happening for me is that I have forged relationships with relatively tight communities(Birmingham, “south Midlands”, Bristol area, general US contacts) where we seriously enjoy each other’s contributions. We really know each others’ work and our comments on each others’ photos actually mean something. Some of us are terribly boring nostalgia buffs but that’s OK, because we get it out of our collective systems. Flickr’s community relationships can be very good for the soul!
I don’t think I have photographed any Pakistani made gloves, or similar subject, and I try not to be too sensational, so the spammers have left me alone. Which is good.
Ian – the feeds contain the small version of the photo (240px wide iirc) and link to the main photo page but Flickr only count when someone loads that main page.
So, for example, someone viewing a photo on this site wouldn’t count but if they clicked on it and went to Flickr it would.
Paul: With you there. Stats have been bogus for years now but I’m old school enough to have a lingering interest in them.
One trend I have noticed recently is a number of requests from non-profit organizations to use and link to Flickr photos. On-line travel guides that are non-profit I find quite acceptable. Using my African photos out of context to support extreme political positions I do not (simply because I want to revisit some of these countries some time in the future!). But at least they ask!
The views at the top of your first page isn’t a count of the number of times your photos have been viewed. I deduced this by adding up my top 20 most viewed pictures, and it came to 30% more than the views on the first page.
Is it the number of views of my photostream then?
Well, Ian, that’s throws my whole ramble for a loop. I’m kinda stumped now.
Will investigate…