Flickr: difference between "most relevant" and "most interesting"

Hi!
I'm starting using Flickr. I notice that in the search engine, photos
can be ordered with 2 criterions: "most relevant" and "most
interesting".
Which is the difference? In which way they are calculated?
Thank you! Bye, Max!

Per Max:
Hi!
I'm starting using Flickr. I notice that in the search engine, photos
can be ordered with 2 criterions: "most relevant" and "most
interesting".
Which is the difference? In which way they are calculated?
Thank you! Bye, Max!

Amen. I posed that question some months ago, but never heard an
answer.
--
PeteCresswell

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Max:
Hi!
I'm starting using Flickr. I notice that in the search engine, photos
can be ordered with 2 criterions: "most relevant" and "most
interesting".
Which is the difference? In which way they are calculated?
Thank you! Bye, Max!

Amen. I posed that question some months ago, but never heard an
answer.

I believe that "most relevant" orders it solely by the relevance of your
search criteria (similar to Google's order by relevance). "Most
interesting" uses a variation of the Flickr Interestingness algorithm
that is used to determine which photos make it into the Explore page.
The Interestingness algorithm is quite complex and includes the number
of groups the photo is in (over a certain threshold makes your photo
less interesting), the number of comments and favorites. It also takes
into account who has commented and favorited your photos (not sure how
it ranks accounts for determining their ability to influence
interestingness).

--
- Barry

"Barry L. Wallis" wrote

I believe that "most relevant" orders it solely by the relevance of your
search criteria (similar to Google's order by relevance). "Most
interesting" uses a variation of the Flickr Interestingness algorithm that
is used to determine which photos make it into the Explore page. The
Interestingness algorithm is quite complex and includes the number of
groups the photo is in (over a certain threshold makes your photo less
interesting), the number of comments and favorites. It also takes into
account who has commented and favorited your photos (not sure how it ranks
accounts for determining their ability to influence interestingness).

Is it that complicated, or is it simply the number of comments received?

All the 'Most Interesting' photos in any category have heaps of comments
(sometimes hundreds over a long period) which suggests (a) the photo is
exceptionally good and (b) it has attracted lots of views, therefore gaining
many invitations to join groups.

Nobody ever seems to comment on mine sigh...

Paul

Paul Bartram wrote:
"Barry L. Wallis" wrote

I believe that "most relevant" orders it solely by the relevance of your
search criteria (similar to Google's order by relevance). "Most
interesting" uses a variation of the Flickr Interestingness algorithm that
is used to determine which photos make it into the Explore page. The
Interestingness algorithm is quite complex and includes the number of
groups the photo is in (over a certain threshold makes your photo less
interesting), the number of comments and favorites. It also takes into
account who has commented and favorited your photos (not sure how it ranks
accounts for determining their ability to influence interestingness).

Is it that complicated, or is it simply the number of comments received?

All the 'Most Interesting' photos in any category have heaps of comments
(sometimes hundreds over a long period) which suggests (a) the photo is
exceptionally good and (b) it has attracted lots of views, therefore gaining
many invitations to join groups.

Nobody ever seems to comment on mine sigh...

Paul



It is definitely more complicated than a simple count of comments
(although they do play a significant role). Flickr staff have confirmed
that the other items affect interestingess (e.g., having a photo in more
than 10 groups) affects you're photos rating. If you are really
interested, you can find the patent for interestingess he
http://preview.tinyurl.com/uljes


--
- Barry

In article .com,
says...
Hi!
I'm starting using Flickr. I notice that in the search engine, photos
can be ordered with 2 criterions: "most relevant" and "most
interesting".
Which is the difference? In which way they are calculated?

The "interestingness" algorithm on flickr is secret, and subject to
frequent tinkering, because they don't want people to game the system to
get their photos rated more interesting.

Among the factors that appear to be considered:

* number of views
* number of comments
* number of people who rate the photo a favorite
* whether the views, comments, favorites come from people in the
photographer's contacts list, or from strangers who happened to find the
photo noteworthy
* how many flickr groups the photo has been posted to, and what type of
groups they are

Looking at the "interestingness" of my own photos, one photo with 220
views, 1 favorite, 1 comment, is less "interesting" than one with only
136 views , 2 favorites, 1 comment. So a favorite is clearly worth
quite a few views.

If you want more information and gobs of speculation, search flickr
groups for "Magic Donkey." (Seriously, that's what people call the
interestingness algorithm, the Magic Donkey.)

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html

On Sep 23, 10:57 pm, wrote:
In article .com,
says...

Hi!
I'm starting using Flickr. I notice that in the search engine, photos
can be ordered with 2 criterions: "most relevant" and "most
interesting".
Which is the difference? In which way they are calculated?

The "interestingness" algorithm on flickr is secret, and subject to
frequent tinkering, because they don't want people to game the system to
get their photos rated more interesting.

Among the factors that appear to be considered:

* number of views
* number of comments
* number of people who rate the photo a favorite
* whether the views, comments, favorites come from people in the
photographer's contacts list, or from strangers who happened to find the
photo noteworthy
* how many flickr groups the photo has been posted to, and what type of
groups they are

Looking at the "interestingness" of my own photos, one photo with 220
views, 1 favorite, 1 comment, is less "interesting" than one with only
136 views , 2 favorites, 1 comment. So a favorite is clearly worth
quite a few views.

If you want more information and gobs of speculation, search flickr
groups for "Magic Donkey." (Seriously, that's what people call the
interestingness algorithm, the Magic Donkey.)

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html

I will second that. My Flickr library is still fairly small. When
somebody marks a pic as a favorite it gets bumped right up to the top
of my most interesting pics.

theclyde wrote:
On Sep 23, 10:57 pm, wrote:
In article .com,
says...

Hi!
I'm starting using Flickr. I notice that in the search engine,
photos can be ordered with 2 criterions: "most relevant" and "most
interesting".
Which is the difference? In which way they are calculated?

The "interestingness" algorithm on flickr is secret, and subject to
frequent tinkering, because they don't want people to game the
system to get their photos rated more interesting.

Among the factors that appear to be considered:

* number of views
* number of comments
* number of people who rate the photo a favorite
* whether the views, comments, favorites come from people in the
photographer's contacts list, or from strangers who happened to
find the photo noteworthy
* how many flickr groups the photo has been posted to, and what
type of groups they are

Looking at the "interestingness" of my own photos, one photo with
220 views, 1 favorite, 1 comment, is less "interesting" than one
with only 136 views , 2 favorites, 1 comment. So a favorite is
clearly worth quite a few views.

If you want more information and gobs of speculation, search flickr
groups for "Magic Donkey." (Seriously, that's what people call the
interestingness algorithm, the Magic Donkey.)

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html

I will second that. My Flickr library is still fairly small. When
somebody marks a pic as a favorite it gets bumped right up to the
top of my most interesting pics.

When someone comments or "favorites" one of mine it moves up on the
"Popular" list. Strange, but my brand of Flickr doesn't seem to have
an "Interesting" list - that I can find, anyway.

My most "Popular" image has 337 views, NO "Favorite" chooses, and five
Comments; just six slots down (out of 200 on the list) is an image
with just 25 views, two "Favorite" chooses, and one comment.

Some one must be looking at these things.

--
Frank ess