Don't worry, be happy... you've done curation and your image sucks, they give it 2% and never more... don't worry, be happy. dah de dahh....

It happens to all of us. There are Lies, Damned Lies and then there are Statistics.

My last image achieved 2% and 4% respectively. That's a 96% disapproval rating!

Ironically (or interstingly) the next day it was selected by Flickr for their 'Explore' page and in 24 hours achived 6.5K views, 140 favoirites and 15 positive comments. 

However, 'Statistacally speaking', the % of Flickr 'favs' vs the number of 'Views' means it has an approval rating of just  2%. That's a 98% disapproval rating! 

So 1x was probably correct in not selecting it. The problem with 1x is they don't show the number of views any image gets, so.... go figure. Anyway, keep singing, Don't worry, be happy!

Peter,

Thanks for your post - it gave me a smile.  A wistful, resigned sort of smile because I've had many of those 2% results.  They sting.  The way it's worded is "2% more popular than other photos according to member curators", so I guess that could be could be interpreted as 52% popularity overall, but the headline is still "2%" and that's what sticks in your mind. 

Steven

Yes, I agree with both of you. The sting is a good description. It is a quick feeling of "Oh no, not as good as I thought, actually it is considered very bad..." and scratch your head. On the other hand, we know better than letting this bring us down. We know what we can do and we do this mostly because we love it. 

Well Peter we have come a long way..... I think.... you could be using a Zenit E camera full of 24 exp Orwo film...

My photo currently in curation is about two thirds of the way through and has no percentage score, just the circles for likes and improvements. Perhaps there is a change afoot... I spoke too soon - it's now 1%.

After exactly two thirds (66 %) of the curation process the score disappears for a short time (a few minutes) and then reappears. With a low score (between 1 % and 4 %), which was the case with my last 6 images, the rejection happens after 75%.

Thank you for the information.

Dear Peter, 

I'm afraid you cannot apply your formula to equate Flickr Explore to 1x curation results. First, Flickr Explore photos are chosen by a computer program, not people. Some pictures are great and others, not so much. Second, at least on Flickr or other platforms like 500px, your pictures have a chance to be viewed, which is not the case here because the Expert Curators decide what they want to show on their website. That is a huge difference. I have sold pictures in the past on Flickr and on 500px because people saw them and decided to contact me to buy a picture. Here people can only see what the "expertl curators decide what they can see.

So out of the 6.5k who saw your picture on Flickr, maybe 1 would be interested in purchasing it. If our pictures are not at least published here on 1x, then they stand zero chance of selling.

Lucie

No, the expert curators are member curators and vote during member curation. They don't decide about selected/awarded or not selected.

Only the head curators (or the founders) are authorized to decide about it.

I think there are many platforms or contest organizers who make at least the preselection done by a computer. A big German photo service provider ran a contest in 2022 (or 2021). More than 600,000 images were submitted. Who shall judge this ? People ?

It is the excessive number of photos that makes this impossible.

If the 1x members were happy with a monthly upload volume of 1 or 2 pics, maybe this would change for the better.

Good light, Hans-Martin

Hello Hans-Martin,

You said "No, the expert curators are member curators and vote during member curation. They don't decide about selected/awarded or not selected.

Only the head curators (or the founders) are authorized to decide about it."

That doesn't change what I said. Simply replace the word "expert curators with "Head curators" in my comment above. The gist of the message is still the same and the results are the same. 

Hello again Martin, 

why should we be happy with an upload of 1 or 2 pictures per month? Why pay a subscription for that?  Don't get me wrong, i do think that part of the curation process is good. We do want to weed out the snapshots, the out of focus pictures, etc. BUT when 56 % or 69 % or 75 % of members vote in favor of publishing a picture, only to have the expert curators and head curators give it a NO Go, then something is not right. After all, the member curators are potential buyers or represent people who might buy a picture. So why not give more weight to their votes? 
i would accept more readily the "verdict" on my photos IF the only pictures that were published were truly SUBLIME, but we all know that it is not the case. And, that is where some of the frustration comes from. 

Another interesting conversation. I have examined photos here and there for several years to find some benchmark for "good photography". I have submitted several dozen and get basically a "thumbs up or thumbs down".  Some photographers here seem to expect to be published and  I don't it . Is there a big incentive to Sell images and without getting "published", no way? I don't put mine up for sale, I place in local galleries. Sales give me satisfaction and sense of accomplishment.  It is almost as good  to get published or awarded.

So, am I missing something am I being naive? Is there real money in the sale of images here or is there the same feeling as selling in gallery? If I put my images for sale do I get higher on the list? Is that what this discussion is about? Or is everyone in the same quest as I am.

I still think of myself as searching for an ideal that guides me about good vs not so good images. I am looking at your images to see if I can find that ideal.

I get more excitement from a sale, no matter how small, than an award. I get the point of getting the recognition from the peers, but it shouldn't be at the cost of success.

I am sure there is something terribly wrong about curation on 1x.com. I submitted the same image 3 times with very different results. See my new forum post "is curation a joke?". Curation is definitely NOT performed by members or experts but a computer programme. Is there any value in it? 

Dear all

For some time, more and more forums have been opened with the same topic : curation. I'm experiencing exactly the same as many others here. Is there an algorithm or not ? Of course the computer works and not the members or exp.curators. Because : Exactly the same there is with the "privileged". There are many who have an award every 2-3 days. Of course, the computer cannot simply generate percentages, but it can remember names! I've also noticed that recent awards all have a like from the same head curator, I've never seen that before! It's not about the 5 euros/month it costs here, it's about the obvious and disrespective dismissal of a large number of photo enthusiasts. Or to put it another way, where should you get the motivation if you know from the outset that you have no chance anyway. Of course, the owners know exactly what's going on there. This is also the reason why they never take a stand. Another disrespect. Now the questions : Is it worth complaining about over and over again ? Is 1X still the ultimate standard for high-end photography, or are there alternatives ? Is it worth participating in this big curation show with all the points, graphics and parameters, marks and so on, which ultimately turns out to be a single bubble ? What advantage we got from a published or award here,respectivly what disadvantage we have if its from another site ? Is it possible that the current behaviour of 1X unwanted makes other sites stronger ?Just ask yourself a few questions like these ! As long as you see 1X as the real and only deal, they will act like it ! Finally i resume that we have to realize that complaining, even if reasonable, does'nt bring us further, we have to accept or doing something !

OK,

Of the 8 billion people on the planet, 1 billion have cameras or cell phones to make images. Of that 1 billion, 100 million make images. Of that 100 million only 10 million make images of things other than their family, their friends or their food. Of that 10 million only 1 million take image making seriously and of those maybe 100 thousand try to make artistic images. All the serious image makers like to think theirs are the best and want to get others to agree; the rest post on Facebook or Instagram.

*Warning, I made these numbers up!

The more serious you are the more likely you are to post images on 1x, then maybe Flickr or 500px or other sites and then Instagram etc. What I am saying is that the universe of 1x viewers and posters is skewed toward that small subset of the world, that is, serious off-duty professionals and serious hobbyists and others interested in "art photography"? What that means is that if you show your photos of spiral staircases or solitary figures in a landscape or an abstract intentional motion photo to friends or family they will get bored quickly (unless they are in it) but may be appreciated on 1x. Or to put it another way, we show this stuff to each other and that is a skewed audience. So when you are being curated you are likely asking, "how good is my photo as judged by other photographers?", not "how is my image appreciated by others in general?". 

In additon to all that, we are serious about photography, its our dedicated interst, and the answers mean something personal to our egos. Perhaps we are like a family but we are also like siblings in the family and we want to be first and best, while still appreciating the rest of the family.

Curation may be done by AI or fellow photographers. Either way there will be a "standard" that develops to judge images. Community judgements may be either more parochial, if a small sampling or more univesal if a large sample. AI may use a larger sampling but likely has a guardrail set of parameters. I had raised the question of cuarting in a another thread wanting to tease out some community preferences but did not come to a conclusion except what I just said. 

There is probably no perfect system. Most of 1x images are very well done; most of 1x images are variations of few themes. This is the result of community preference (or AI rules). The only thing that I can suggest is that if curation is done by community, publish the "n" of curators. It would help the artist. If fewer curators then less secure score, if many then more secure score. Otherwise if we understand the limitations of the universe of any site, we should consider accepting that the standard is the mean. We could change that with more curators or use AI with different "rules" or we could examine the sentiment of the community through discussion.

Some thoughts : )

For me curation has always been useful, both when my photos went through the process, and when I did/do this and try to notice everything that matters in a frame.

It was a learning exercise for me because it happened that a photo that I did not appreciate was published and I wondered what I was not paying attention to, if it was the effect of a bias, and which one,.And of course, I always realized what pulled me back and I felt sorry for my vote.

I really try to do it with responsibility and openness because I also feel empathy.

It also happens that after I send an image in the curation process, I realize that it has a problem. It seems that it looks different on the website than it looked on my display : D   

I notice some weaknesses that in my bubble at home, with focus on something specific, I didn't notice.

Sometimes I upload a new version, sometimes I think that after curation I will do it better if it can be improved.Sometimes it can’t : )

But I can honestly say that the curation process was always accurate in my case, with no exceptions.

There were cases when I sent the rejected image for critique because I was  interested in a more specific comment, for example where/why the narrative and the visual solution do not have coherence or aspects related to the inability of the image to convey the idea, or whatever is not working well in the frame.

I believe that the curation process is useful, even if it is not perfect or satisfactory for everyone.Maybe it depends on how we relate to it - we see it only through the prism of finality or we see it as a phase in which the picture, like a song on a demo, it is put on the radio to be received by a diverse audience.

We are not all professionals and this makes the curation process more challenging and interesting.Statististics with enough data never fail.

Honestly, every of my photographs that has not been published  pushed me to think and to learn, to try better, and after curation I could think  to approach the topic differently or more carefully, fact that gave me a lot of inspiration and satisfaction.

I don't know if I was a professional photographer I would have focused on the result of the curation as the goal, maybe yes, but as an amateur I feel very relaxed about the result of the curation process because I benefit from a lot of feedback and I receive it on a site where there are demands and on which I am amazed every day when I look at the galleries.So I can experiment a lot and see how it is perceived something new I have in mind.

Well, it seems that today I was in writting mood : D

Warm regards!

I haven't bern able to make sense of the statistics. The last photo I had published had 1% more popular by member curators and 2% more popular by expert curators. It still got poblished (not aearded), and I don't know why.