[Leica] 1/4 million views (so what?)

[hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson)]

All good Sonny. No conclusions were harmed in the making of our posts ;-)
So the specifics of the Pbase statistics reported to the gallery owner are:
On opening page (dashboard)....cumulative page views since account opened.
There is an option to reset gallery hitcounts there.
Aggregate daily page views for last two months. For each date you can call
up most viewed (top 11) galleries and images in descending order
for each gallery and its sub-galleries you can then see a cumulative total
hitcount since that specific gallery was started and each individual image
shows its own too.
If you reorganize sub-galleries for example the total is preserved even
where images are moved, deleted or replaced.
Where you change some structure it can be harder to follow. The
sub-galleries totalled may not be the same number as the parent. There can
be orphaned hits floating around in the mix I guess!.
I hope that helps. Generally I like their interface for my on-line
galleries and mostly it is responsive to operate too. For about $23 a year
to host up to 1000MB I can't complain.





Cheers
Geoff
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman


On 3 July 2014 09:16, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think you jumped to to a conclusion. I was asking how the numbers are
> presented, as they are not shown to the public.  It is a situation I'm
> earnestly interested in, because it is a complicated matter to get accurate
> counts of visits.  My little website is for fun, but at
> www.library.nsula.edu I preside over several hundred pages, and I would
> love to be able to figure out accurate page counts to account for the 1.2
> million database visits I get there a year.   It would help us in the
> budget process as these academic databases don't come cheap.
> We also cannot use cute chicks to lure clicks. ;-)
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> > On Jul 2, 2014, at 5:55 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Sonny I don't know anything about your webalyser but I can say with
> > confidence that I am not personally adding tens of thousands of clicks to
> > boost my PBase stats! Doesn't trouble me in any case and of course, it
> > isn't a contest. No income generated for me.
> >
> > PBase will show you a daily aggregate, most viewed plus gallery and
> > individual image breakdowns for any date.
> >
> > It is extremely obvious what styles of images attract the most views and
> of
> > course a more people look they tend to look next time as well. A critical
> > mass has developed perhaps ;-)
> > Remember that my primary work is with models currently (from portraiture
> > through fashion/glamour and up to art nude styles). As well as the
> > membership numbers and participation, you can understand that the subject
> > matter massively changes the interest levels. People like to look at
> > attractive women. It is a very long standing societal truth.
> > For whatever it is worth if I put say ten BW images in a gallery with
> > colour work views of the colour images  far exceed anything in BW however
> > much I might like what I've done in BW (and I use BW when I think it is
> > better for the content, not just for variety).
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> > Geoff
> > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
> >
> >
> >> On 3 July 2014 07:24, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I enjoy having Webalizer analytics that show these views on my own site:
> >>
> >> [Daily Statistics] [Hourly Statistics] [URLs] [Entry] [Exit] [Sites]
> >> [Referrers] [Search] [Users] [Agents] [Countries]
> >>
> >> I've seen discussions on Dpreview questioning the numbers rendered by
> the
> >> Pbase counters.
> >>
> >> I'm wondering if the Pbase stats have a way of excluding author clicks
> and
> >> bots from the numbers you are seeing, or are you just seeing numbers?
> The
> >> nice thing about Webalizer is that all those things are broken down
> >> cleanly, so you can get a rather clear picture of just what images are
> >> performing well, and to what kind of audience down to browser types.
> >>
> >> It is a tough problem, when sometimes your image gets snagged in
> >> Stumbleupon, or some forum, and so your image count skyrockets, though
> you
> >> may not be getting any actual views in your album.
> >>
> >> That's another advantage to Webalizer on my own site, as I can find
> issues
> >> like that and pull pictures that might be misused in some way.  If I
> track
> >> them and find the use is innocent, I usually just let it be, or I
> watermark
> >> the image.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Sonny
> >> http://sonc.com/look/
> >> Natchitoches, Louisiana
> >> 1714
> >> Oldest Permanent Settlement in the Louisiana Purchase
> >>
> >> USA
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Leica Users Group.
> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>