500px

So I decided to upload some photographs to 500px. I have had a few 'like' for my images. The highest 'pulse' I have scored is around 91. There is no doubt the quality of vast majority of images are of great quality but I am puzzled at some of the shots getting hundreds of 'likes'. Take , for instance, the image below. Can someone explain to me what photographic quality this has?
link

Yuk!

Im a bit in the dark over that one !

It's got to be great, it was taken on an iphone!
Now if the phone could produce a raw file to recover the detail in the murk it might help (marginally.)

It works like any such site I guess. Spend hours liking other's work and you will most likely be reciprocated.

Part of the reason I am not a fan of the social media photo sharing formula is that I feel people feel obliged to 'like' stuff to get liked back. It's particularly prominent on 500px but also true for flickr, fb, instagram and even Nat Geo's own platform. People that network well are 'rated' higher. Is it wrong? I don't know but it's certainly not my thing. Ha, Simon beat me to it

I have wondered about this in relation to Photocrowd. You see two images that, to all intents and purposes, are of similar quality. One gets raved at and the other ignored. On the other hand, their manner of annonymous rating in competitions, with thousands of raters judging them, appears to be reasonably robust. Another gambit I have seen is for someone to swamp the daily feed with image after image (to fix a style in one's mind?) and then enter a competition with a similar one at the final moment.

I cannot imagine how anyone viewing this image with a modicum of basic photgraphic principles would feel positive or interested in such a photo.

As regards why there is 213 likes - Cliques resiprocate "ego massage" and mutual protection; it just seems to happens in any group to varying degrees; " I will like you if you will like me" as long as you don't criticise my work I won't criticise you etc etc

Luckily in PU there is a god body of competent and interested enthusists who give and take objective criticism and praise in a proper balanced way.

However my experiences as a long time member of several other forums associated with major photographic equipment manufactures has been "quite a yawn" to say the least.

Not like PU, at all; Some camera clubs suffer from the same BS too so we are lucky I think.

I suspect the comments about that photo might relate to the place and the somewhat poetic sentiments, which obviously mean something esoteric: but not with the photo, which is totally abysmal clearly not taken by a competent student of the craft .




as for the photo maybe it was taken as a reminder or nostalgic memo not as a

Thanks guys.
I am glad you all share my views about the particular image - I was afraid I was the only one not appreciating the artistic value of the photograph.

The chap who took the photo has 76,000 followers (how did he get that many? That is the real question!)

There have been 10,000 views with 250 likes. This is a strike ratio of 2.5% (not so good!)

The 'Pulse' works off speed and likes (lots quickly shoots you up the board).

I, however, look at my strike rate - percentage of likes out of views

Makes me feel better anyway!

Plus I have no friends