Looking through the public galleries on my sites on Facebook, Flickr, Panoramio, and even on my own photography website there is a huge variation in the number or views of each image, and still more surprisingly some photos that have had not many views attract large numbers of comments and likes.
In today's world of on line photo sharing most sites show thumbnail images of your pictures with the invitation to visitors to click on a thumbnail to see a larger image.
When I am browsing through a site that may contain anywhere from 10 to 100+ thumbnails per page some thumbnails stand out.
For me it is usually the thumbnail images with strong simple composition, show a clear subject, perhaps lots of negative space, large areas of strong complementary colours or very strong leading lines that grab my attention. In my own galleries I find images of these type are the ones that also get the most views.
Sometimes (but not always) these images also get the most comments and favourites. Occasionally they don't, and it usually those that do invoke the "wow" or "awesome," comments. These are the pictures that have created an immediate emotional connection with the viewer and the motivation to comment.
Flickr has an interesting feature called "Galleries," where you can choose up to 18 images taken by others and show them off as a gallery.
As an exercise if you are on Flickr, and say if you like landscape photography choose a type or style of image and go create a gallery selecting "wow" pictures of places that you haven't been. When you have finished selecting, go back and type into the comments section why you selected the image while trying to be as specific as possible. If you can't describe why you like an image, perhaps then it is not a "wow"image on reflection.
When looking at your own favourite pictures in your galleries you have to distance yourself from the memories that you automatically attach to your experience when you took the image. I find it is almost impossible to do, however to any photo when you say "You should have been there," it is an automatic fail in the eyes of others.
When you next see a picture of a place that you have never been too, and it causes you to say "wow" it means the photographer has created an image that "stands alone" and requires no supporting caption or personal experience to enjoy.
If we want our photo sharing sites to be popular, and although it is hard, we should regularly audit our galleries to see which images are gaining the most attention. These are the images your visitors are connecting with and they stand alone.
A word of caution though, if many of the comments are from people who have been to the same place, their comments may be being influenced by the personal memories of the location too.
Cull those images that are generating little interest. They only detract from your visitors enjoyment of your site.
Leave a comment with your thoughts.
Some photos just describe a place to an audience so they can see what it is like, even though it may be a boring photo it is still a valid photo because it tells people what that place is like. Some photos are 'Wow' photos because a place is spectacular and some are 'Wow' photos because they've been 'tricked' up by increasing saturation or a thunderstorm or something else. I think it's all valid. If all your photos are 'Wow' photos their effect diminishes over time too. I think the contrast is needed - like light and shade, interesting photo - boring photo. I think what I'm trying to say is that the lesser photos make you realise that the better photos are better. Cheers Fran.
ReplyDelete