Carl
![]() |
||||||
Posted: May 21, 2010 11:05 pm | ||||||
Carl
![]() |
I guess it's deliberate - ok well interesting change
![]() |
|||||
Posted: May 22, 2010 1:16 am | ||||||
Carl
![]() |
just needs arrows [ or something ] on each filter to say rising/falling
![]() |
|||||
Posted: May 22, 2010 1:21 am | ||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
Well, kinda makes sense to what filters are "currently" being used the most. Maybe FF should have two catagorie....."Currently Popular" and "Most Used".....
![]() What would be really wierd is all of my filters at the very top of the popular category.....then you would know something is wrong..... ![]() ![]() Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||
Posted: May 22, 2010 11:11 am | ||||||
StevieJ
![]() |
I was right about that..... FF posted this..... "Our list of popular filters has been stale for years, due to a rigid ranking algorithm. We're going to shake things up a little -- the new algorithm we're testing gives more weight to newer filters, so the list will be more dynamic. Check it out and let us know what you think!" Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
|||||
Posted: May 22, 2010 6:26 pm | ||||||
Carl
![]() |
yeah that would be good ![]() |
|||||
Posted: May 22, 2010 10:28 pm | ||||||
ThreeDee
![]() |
I have also been under the impression it has been broken all this time. Particularly "All filters by popularity" makes no sense when some have thousands of downloads, some tens. Even changing the heading to "All popular filters" would help clarify it. Better yet, the selection could be explained in some fashion -- "Most downloads in the last week", or some such thing.
|
|||||
Posted: March 16, 2014 1:46 pm | ||||||
GMM
Moderator
Posts: 3491 |
I suppose it's been working as designed all the time. Filters are sorted by usage rank on this page.
Just curious: how would your change help clarify anything? Isn't your version more general than the current one? |
|||||
Posted: March 17, 2014 7:40 am | ||||||
Yuya
![]() |
Right, IT does behave as discussed but we naturally expect "Popular" to display something like "what got frequently downloaded this week" sort of thing. Key idea: naturally expect.
|
|||||
Posted: March 18, 2014 6:55 am | ||||||
GMM
Moderator
Posts: 3491 |
I see, just don't call it "broken"
![]() BTW, the text on that page was written by Vladimir personally. He obviously doesn't want to have a list of top downloads. |
|||||
Posted: March 18, 2014 10:59 am | ||||||
totte
![]() |
When I looked a few days ago, the third most popular filter had Usagerank: Low, that was very odd.
- I never expected the Spanish inquisition |
|||||
Posted: March 19, 2014 7:12 am | ||||||
jffe |
It's been borked for years now ha-ha. Regardless of ---- "Usage Rank is not numerical, it has only three grades: Low, Average and High. Strict numerical sorting would place the most popular filters to the top of the list, giving them more and more exposure and, therefore, opportunity to get still more usage ("the rich get richer"). A non-numerical rank lets us avoid this problem, while retaining the relative popularity of a filter." ---- it's still been nowhere near very useful. That said, some real crap gets HU awards, just ask me, ie = some of my filters have ha-ha.
![]() jffe Filter Forger |
|||||
Posted: March 19, 2014 11:35 pm | ||||||
ThreeDee
![]() |
[QUOTE] GMM wrote: I suppose it's been working as designed all the time. Filters are sorted by usage rank on this page.[/QUOTE]
It almost sounds like it looks different at your end than ours. Here's what I see (see enclosed image). When I read "Filters by popularity" I expect to see the most popular filters in sequence of popularity. So, I get the first six filters being: 1. Usage rank: High, 1948 dowloads 2. Usage rank: High, 1532 downloads 3. Usage rank: Average, 94 downloads 4. Usage rank: Average, 62 downloads 5. Usage rank: High, 1675 downloads 6. Usage rank: Low, 1735 downloads To my eye it looks completely random. I know there is logic behind it in that it is calculated in relation to how long the filter has been in existence. But since this is not explained anywhere on the page, it took me years to discover that, and only when I was finally going to write a bug report on it and searched the forum if it had already been reported and commented upon! [QUOTE] ThreeDee wrote: changing the heading to "All popular filters" would help clarify it. [QUOTE] GMM wrote: Just curious: how would your change help clarify anything? Isn't your version more general than the current one?[/QUOTE] The key point there, althrough a very poor attempt at handling, was that the phrase "by popularity" is generally understood to mean "in descending sequence of popularity", so one would expect to see either the filters with A) most downloads OR B) just high-usage filters in the beginning, and neither is the case. So it is confusing. "All popular filters" would avoid some of the apparent confusion. But it is not a handling. The page is not broken, it is just hard to comprehend. And, in my opinion, impossible for anyone who hasn't seen the explanation. That is why I suggest the ranking criteria on that page should be explained on that page. TD ![]() |
|||||
Posted: March 20, 2014 12:09 pm | ||||||
Indigo Ray
![]() |
I believe the "popular" list is as Skybase says. It measures what filters are being most used (apply / save-image) today (or this week or some other short time span). That is why recently-submitted filters are often near the top of the "popular" list.
I think "usage rank" is more like an average popularity over a longer span of time, maybe several months. The labels "high" or "low" are only applied after this long time span, otherwise the filter is "average". According to GMM's link, usage rank is also based on which category the filter is submitted to. |
|||||
Posted: March 20, 2014 3:05 pm | ||||||
EAdams
![]()
Posts: 447 |
Why the reluctance to rename the section or add an explanation in order to more aptly describe the algorithm behind the choice of filters being displayed? Filter Forge Inc is doing itself a disservice by having a feature on their website that has the appearance of being broken. If the algorithm were changed tomorrow to feature only filters that contain the letter "I" in their name, the results would appear to be no less random.
Regarding the "rich get richer" aspect of featuring popular filters, the "Featured Filters" functionality might be a prime cause of this phenomenon. The same filters pop up again and again (maybe a filter has to be an editor's pick to be included). Nevertheless, this feature does a good job in highlighting the capabilities of the product. |
|||||
Posted: March 21, 2014 4:18 am | ||||||
vwg |
I for one, believe there should be a random listing of filters. I keep seeing the same authors, and I applaud them, but, some authors get no exposure at all. Even at the top, where 3 filters are prominently featured, I believe it should include more of the authors who have submitted their work.
vwg |
|||||
Posted: March 22, 2014 9:38 pm | ||||||
jffe |
I smell a mutiny !!! ha-ha.
![]() jffe Filter Forger |
|||||
Posted: March 23, 2014 4:30 pm | ||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
YES! I think that the "popular" list as it is now, is well done and right with the name, although maybe should be changed to "Popular Today" or "Popular this week" because this is what it really is It does not matter at all if the filter has a high or low usage, or if it has a high or low number of downloads, or it is new or old. Is not a list of the most popular filters of all time and the most used filters or most downloaded The key is that the filter shown for whatever reason is popular today and does not matter what happened with the filter before, and this is why also why there are also many NEW filters with ver few downloads being popular at the top of the list, as they have been downloaded many times on the same day. |
|||||
Posted: March 24, 2014 10:09 am | ||||||
Yuya
![]() |
No, it's just plain unexpected. Yeah ok, it's totally not broken. It's just unexpected.
In the end, the fact that it has to be explained on the forums is already silly. No, it's not broken. Technically not broken. But it broke people's expectations. And there's room for a second thought and improvement. |
|||||
Posted: March 24, 2014 12:27 pm | ||||||
SpaceRay
![]() |
I recognize and agree that the filter list of popularity is NOT good in the way that "All filters by popularity" may be confusing and you think that in the list will be the most popular filters of all time, and this is a list of popularity ONLY for today and how these filters are used and/or downloaded today
Sorry that I do not know what you mean with "unexpected", from my point of view and understanding how it Works showing only the most popular filters USED on this day, it would be always unexpected as you can´t know what filters will the FF users use, so I do not understand what is the thing that you "expect" to have in the list ![]()
Maybe it is me that I do not understand or expect anything different, and is my fault or mistake, and I am asking here a silly question below Sorry that I still do not know or understand WHICH ones are these broken expectations? Do you expect and want to have a list with only the most downloaded filters? Do you want a list with the most used filters? |
|||||
Posted: March 25, 2014 8:10 am |
Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!
33,712 Registered Users
+19 new in 30 days!
153,534 Posts
+31 new in 30 days!
15,348 Topics
+72 new in year!
29 unregistered users.