ridiculous amount of views in 1.5 days of registering

runner450runner450 Registered Users Posts: 10 Big grins
edited September 8, 2008 in SmugMug Support
as the title says, I signed up just under 36 hours ago and I've already got 1000+ photo views and 6000+ "hits" for all of my galleries...

surely, with no advertising, this can't be right...?

a little help?
http://briancrissie.smugmug.com/

Comments

  • runner450runner450 Registered Users Posts: 10 Big grins
    edited September 4, 2008
    i mostly retract my question - looks like viewing an entire page of thumbs will count each one...grrr
    http://briancrissie.smugmug.com/
  • MontecMontec Registered Users Posts: 823 Major grins
    edited September 6, 2008
    brian.crissie wrote:
    i mostly retract my question - looks like viewing an entire page of thumbs will count each one...grrr

    You really need to understand how the stats work...I asked the same question after getting 50,000 image views one month...eek7.gif.

    You need to look at how many medium and large views there were to get anything close to actual views.
    Cheers,
    Monte
  • mbellotmbellot Registered Users Posts: 465 Major grins
    edited September 8, 2008
    One other thing to keep in mind. I've noticed that using the watermark feature causes a "hit" per photo watermarked.

    Its a bit disturbing to notice 1000+ hits to an original file in a non-public gallery until you put it all together.
  • cabbeycabbey Registered Users Posts: 1,053 Major grins
    edited September 8, 2008
    mbellot wrote:
    One other thing to keep in mind. I've noticed that using the watermark feature causes a "hit" per photo watermarked.

    Its a bit disturbing to notice 1000+ hits to an original file in a non-public gallery until you put it all together.

    uhm, that smells like a bug. Did you mention that in the bug report thread?
    SmugMug Sorcerer - Engineering Team Champion for Commerce, Finance, Security, and Data Support
    http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
  • dogwooddogwood Registered Users Posts: 2,572 Major grins
    edited September 8, 2008
    Also consider code like statcounter.com. For me anyway, it's a pretty cool and accurate way to track page visits and photo views. Only catch is the free version is limited to something like 100 listings. :cry Easily overcome if you're not a cheapskate like me though.
    Portland, Oregon Photographer Pete Springer
    website blog instagram facebook g+

  • timnosenzotimnosenzo Registered Users Posts: 405 Major grins
    edited September 8, 2008
    I use Google Analytics. Free, easy to use, pretty robust, and free. ;)
    connecticut wedding photographer
  • mbellotmbellot Registered Users Posts: 465 Major grins
    edited September 8, 2008
    cabbey wrote:
    uhm, that smells like a bug. Did you mention that in the bug report thread?

    Nope. I figured since the WM tool had to access the original WM file to perform the watermarking it kind of made sense.

    What I would like in the reports is an option for "custom" reports that can be set up to include or exclude certain galleries from the report (a "full" version is still good). It would make tracking hits to recently posted event galleries much easier if I didn't have to wade through all the old stuff too.
Sign In or Register to comment.