Comments: 832
chinchongcha In reply to ??? [2016-12-01 03:14:20 +0000 UTC]
In my opinion, your ratio of favorite per view is quite low compare to your number of watchers.
You need more execution of background and composition.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
waywardgal In reply to chinchongcha [2016-12-04 07:15:50 +0000 UTC]
What do you mean by "background and composition"?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
chinchongcha In reply to waywardgal [2016-12-04 09:52:24 +0000 UTC]
try to use camera angle or perspective. Don't stick with rectangular area space.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
thegeforce [2013-07-02 06:37:02 +0000 UTC]
found this through the random deviation button
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
battlebrothertherix [2012-07-18 14:03:18 +0000 UTC]
I don't see much actual description of the Fair Exposure algorithm.
You've told us that there is one, but I'm afraid I don't see much actual description.
I'm afraid it isn't even cleverly concealed.
How does the Fair Exposure algorithm work, exactly?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The-UglyTruth In reply to battlebrothertherix [2012-07-18 14:12:32 +0000 UTC]
Do you do web development? Do you understand mySQL/PHP, queries and limits?
Even if you did, why would they tell you 'how' its done? What would be the point? Do you see google telling people how it gathers it's search results?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
battlebrothertherix In reply to The-UglyTruth [2012-07-18 14:16:49 +0000 UTC]
Pretty much, yes.
We know how google gathers its results.
Closest word match-up.
Nearest relevance.
Most popular result selected based on previous two parameters.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The-UglyTruth In reply to battlebrothertherix [2012-07-18 14:18:55 +0000 UTC]
'Nearest relevance'.
And how is that defined, exactly? You obviously don't understand the complexity behind it if you think it's that simple. Cut the developers some slack, what they're doing isn't exactly easy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
battlebrothertherix In reply to The-UglyTruth [2012-07-18 14:20:09 +0000 UTC]
Closest relevance: Defined by keywords and definitions written into website coding.
It's closest match-up of words, as in the first parameter, only in greater detail.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The-UglyTruth In reply to battlebrothertherix [2012-07-18 14:23:40 +0000 UTC]
How do they sort it? Decide what is more relevant? It goes way beyond metadata. You've got spiders, filters, analytics, an endless length of parameters. You could go ask google but, oh wait, they don't hand out their algorithms. Why? Because it's their secret to success. I still think you don't grasp exactly what you're trying to talk about here.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
battlebrothertherix In reply to The-UglyTruth [2012-07-18 14:25:38 +0000 UTC]
Even so, I'm not asking for an in-depth analysis. The journal said it would explain Fair Exposure but didn't at all.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The-UglyTruth In reply to battlebrothertherix [2012-07-18 14:27:23 +0000 UTC]
"Fair Exposure's goal is to showcase the most popular deviations in a variety of styles, genres, and art forms, without bias towards a particular topic."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
battlebrothertherix In reply to The-UglyTruth [2012-07-18 14:29:17 +0000 UTC]
Means and ends are different things.
That's the goal of Fair Exposure, not Fair Exposure itself.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
SyntheticsArt [2012-06-27 22:53:34 +0000 UTC]
Lets start an art riot
Journal: [link]
Group: [link] front page
Image: [link]
-- For the people who deserve --
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
snicholes0000 [2012-06-24 05:58:07 +0000 UTC]
I know im very late to the punch on this one, but fair exposure was brought to my attention only about a week ago, by a site moderator, actually. It's a shame the way all this works. The thing is, group mods and other painters, website owners seem to really like my stuff. Ive been recently asked to do art for several websites and people, and (until i quit yesterday) i was a working concept artist. I get very little views, but from all the right people. I ve never been on front page, and im sure i never will. This should be a showing place for mid level artists, not people whos stuff is so bad and theyre just fishing for a compliment, and not for the famous pros either. Do you think Stanley Lau needs you to make him more popular? Who doesnt know Artgerm? He has so much work he can barely finish it(his paintings sometimes take up to 100 hours) I am not just some guy having fun. This is my career and i take it more seriously than you could know. I think its ENTIRELY unfair that i have to compete with naked women. If you hand a man a picture of an alex ross painting and one of a beautiful nude woman, what do you think hes going to look at? I have no respect for people who make their living by taking off their clothes. NO algorithm will fix this, and of course there are far too many images to personally look through. The only thing i can think of that will fix this? Deviantphoto. It should be an entirely diff site. Not bc i don't consider it art, but i don't at all care about a frontpage full of kittens and nude women, lip gloss designs and 5,000 views for a photo of a pencil. Its so sad. Im shocked we even have to report gamers, bc they are right on the frontpage every day, where you can see it. It's so ridiculous the way they attempt to defend themselves. Now that i know how to report them, ill just do that instead. Thanks for your time.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
maplebee [2012-05-08 15:03:39 +0000 UTC]
Would be nice to see Fair Exposure also strive to allow unseen artists on the front page by mitigating the presence of already popular artists. There are a few (I don't want to mention names and draw haters down on them when the artists have done nothing wrong) who end up on the front page every single day (usually with the same series of works) - and to say 'every day' is no exaggeration whatsoever. Would be nice if, when an artist makes the front page so many times within a certain time frame, the system then doesn't choose them for the front page for a few days (or whatever span seems fair).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
snicholes0000 In reply to maplebee [2012-06-24 05:34:44 +0000 UTC]
My thoughts exactly. Nothing but photos of kittens and naked women.(which has apparently become my catchphrase) Ive spent the last day arguing back and forth with a guy who got 5,ooo friggin views for a photo of a pencil. Thats absolutely absurd.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
battlebrothertherix In reply to snicholes0000 [2012-07-18 13:58:50 +0000 UTC]
Sure, there are some pieces rightfully on the front page, but most of it isn't.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
EliteJohan [2012-05-07 11:49:07 +0000 UTC]
So why did =sanguisGelidus get suspended? For starting the petition that you reply to in a friendsly manner here? I don't know if that's why he was suspended, but I can't see any other reasons...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
shellandshilo [2012-04-30 15:29:54 +0000 UTC]
I DON'T AGREE i JUST COME ON HERE TO JUST POST MY PHOTO'S TO HAVE FUN AND ADMIRE OTHER DEVIANTS AND THEIR CREATIVE TALENT IF I WANT POLITIC'S i WILL TURN ON THE NEWS i THINK i WILL STICK TO DESKTOPNEXUS MORE FUN AND LESS CATEGORY'S i JUST CAME ON TO BROWSE AND FOUND ALL THESE NOTICE'S THAT SAID i PUT MY PHOTO'S IN THE WRONG CAT AND THEY HAVE BEEN MOVED HOW RUDE MADE ME FEEL LIKE A CHEAT PLEASE GET A LIFE THIS IS SUPPOSE TO BE ENJOYABLE NOT ANY MORE
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
EliteJohan In reply to shellandshilo [2012-05-07 11:14:45 +0000 UTC]
I see your deviations have the right category, and it's not always a category fits perfectly, but placing traditional art in Photoshop .psd files is simply retarded... (just an example)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
KiriYume [2012-04-29 01:13:18 +0000 UTC]
Thats much better <_< I was getting tired of seeing the same deviations EVERY day. Popular mi baxside! Its forced popularity and that's kinda unfair
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
JeanFan [2012-04-27 01:06:49 +0000 UTC]
"In the meantime, while those enhancements are still being refined, swift action will be taken against any deviant who is found to be purposely and/or flagrantly manipulating Fair Exposure. Such action might include a site suspension or ban. "
So where can we report people who are still gaming? It's been a few weeks since your announcement but I'm still seeing deviations being shuffled through particular categories to gain an advantage by the same people who've been and still are gaming the system. I don't think most gamers see your threat as capable of being coalesced into any action. And frankly, I don't think this announcement is really anything more than a PR stunt.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Heidi In reply to JeanFan [2012-04-29 08:57:01 +0000 UTC]
Please report any suspicions you have, being as detailed as possible, to our Help Desk. [link]
Thank you.
~Heidi
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
tigris-lily [2012-04-26 01:17:59 +0000 UTC]
I feel that showcasing only popular categories does not make it 'fair'. It would make more sense to pick out by HAND the 'hidden gems' of devintArt, then show us. No one can cheat the system that way, and we all get a fair amount of exposure.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
EliteJohan In reply to tigris-lily [2012-05-07 11:16:50 +0000 UTC]
That would be a personal feature, and not at all what deviantART as several unique individuals would think.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
trixieg [2012-04-24 13:19:21 +0000 UTC]
It seems that "Fair Exposure" cancels out "Popular" browsing. By assigning what is to be shown, then it is no longer filtered on the basis of being popular.
It also undermines the purpose of having a Daily Deviation. If dA is already jurying what is shown in the search filter, why showcase more art? The Daily Deviation just becomes one more category where the user is force-fed suggestions. Only the DD is a more reliable source; quite often the popular search results show remarkably unpopular art (art with less the 100 pageviews and zero comments, yet still high up on the front page).
Also, wasn't the purpose of Groups to offset the natural juggernaut of the popular search feature? So that the user could dig deeper into his or her field of interest?
I understand the rationale behind a fair exposure algorithm, but I think it has to coexist with the popular search function. Because users still want their popular search, with all it's warts and stagnancy. A fair exposure search filter should be an opt in feature, running in tandem to popular search. Not replacing it.
Instead of a forced search filter, I would welcome another dedicated segment of the search page — like the Daily Deviation — which highlighted art from all the categories. Not juried (like DD), just showcased based on popularity/topic/etc. That kind of Fair Exposure could happily coexist with the rest of the dA's features without undermining the structure that users have already bought into.
I notice that many of the serious comments remain unaddressed. Does dA have an ombudsman?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Pactosh [2012-04-23 17:11:35 +0000 UTC]
Meh.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
C7colours In reply to EmmaL27 [2012-04-23 18:27:30 +0000 UTC]
I agree. It could easily be used and abused by trolls, but I support the artist having the option to accept or deny tags.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
moni158 [2012-04-22 11:24:58 +0000 UTC]
I wouldn't call prioritising certain categories 'fair'.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
scholarwarrior-lad [2012-04-22 02:48:40 +0000 UTC]
I find it somewhat ironic something that puts more popular things more prominently is called "fair exposure" or "balanced viewing". It's all in the reference framing and wording...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
ZaraAlfonso [2012-04-22 00:52:13 +0000 UTC]
I think the 'fair exposure' is kinda killing most of the exposure dA brings to artists period. A lot less people are looking at the front page which means less exposure or everybody. DA's front page is what attracts people to join the site, to see beautiful artwork and the prospect of exposure, but with both of those things gone I find it much less appealing, and judging by the comments so do many others.
I would suggest having both the old popular system back, and the fair exposure system as maybe a 'varied' option, and if it's not possible to host the both of them then I would prefer having the old system back. There is plenty of ways to get exposure on da, groups, dds, features ect and if people want to see photography, read literature or see fractal art they can very well go search for it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
micahgoulart In reply to ZaraAlfonso [2012-04-22 05:40:21 +0000 UTC]
How do you know less people are looking at the front page?
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
EmmaL27 In reply to micahgoulart [2012-04-23 15:16:09 +0000 UTC]
I never look at the front page. I go directly to my messages.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
straw-hat [2012-04-21 23:56:53 +0000 UTC]
I've seen several people trying to get more views by abusing keywords. I wish there was a way to fix that problem. :/
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
MystykNess [2012-04-21 23:22:15 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, I also like the idea of being able to switch between the "most popular overall" settings and the fair exposure settings. I think it's great that you guys are trying to pu the "fair" in "Fair Exposure", but I'd still like to see the overall popularity from time to time.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
inaerx [2012-04-21 22:33:20 +0000 UTC]
I'm agreeing with =ProdigyBombay , this "fair exposure" isn't much of a fair exposure....
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
CarmenVeloso [2012-04-21 21:33:44 +0000 UTC]
"In the meantime, while those enhancements are still being refined, swift action will be taken against any deviant who is found to be purposely and/or flagrantly manipulating Fair Exposure. Such action might include a site suspension or ban."
What do you mean by deviants who are purposely and/ or flagrantly manipulating Fair Exposure?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Megami-Yaiba In reply to CarmenVeloso [2012-04-22 03:32:07 +0000 UTC]
There are apparently people who purposely uploaded unrelated pieces to really obscure categories, which are more likely to make the front page using Fair Exposure.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
CarmenVeloso In reply to Megami-Yaiba [2012-04-22 13:16:37 +0000 UTC]
But are the obscure categories more popular?
And what are obscure categories? Macabre & Horror?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Megami-Yaiba In reply to CarmenVeloso [2012-04-22 17:32:21 +0000 UTC]
The Fair Exposure system more or less takes the most popular item from each category, which means that even less popular categories have a chance to be on the front page. Which is nice, but then categories that get uploads very rarely (IDK, ex Theatre Design or something) can be used to get on the front page (Uploading something completely unrelated to that category there, and then much less favorites/views than required normally can launch it to the front page)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
CarmenVeloso In reply to Megami-Yaiba [2012-04-22 21:54:34 +0000 UTC]
Ahhhhh! Now I get it! I thought Fair Exposure featured the most popular deviations all time and didn't consider their categories.
Ok, ok.
Thank you!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>