It seems if you click to see someones pics in the larger sizes....it gives them credit for a download....so the downloaded stats are kinda skewed......i looked at several bad pics in the larger sizes....(even though most pics on this site are very well done).....i didnt leave bad posts for these pics...(if you cant say anything nice :) ) but the pic still gets credit for a downlaod? Am I wrong on this thinking?

a download is a full-size view of a pic...
a view is a view of the page with the pic...
both of which are important components of the C-index calculation.

download=your computer accepts the file from the server
when you click on the thumbnail the server uploads the file to your computer, your computer downloads it to a temp directory and displays it to you, whether or not you saved another copy in another location does not change the fact that you've downloaded the file from the server, this is a common misconception

I understand the theory behind downloading........But if you have a category called views and a category called downloads..well.they are one in the same.....most people consider it downloaded when they save a copy of something to disc or hard drive....When I read USA Todya online, I say I read USA Today online.....not that I downloaded USA Toady

they do save a copy to their hard drive, in a temp folder, if you mean they consider it downloading when they save a second copy in another location, then most people are simply wrong :)

I'd almost agree with jwicker on this one. I completely understand the logic behind what a download is and that is what you say it is. But, in my oppinion to really view a picture you must see it full size. I very rarly look at a picture in only the small form. You can miss the best part of the picture that way. It kinda interesting really that not someone not fully seeing your work can acctually hurt the c-index of the image.

The idea is that if the image really sucks then that is often clear from the preview, and most people won't waste time with a longer download if they think the image is bad. True, single individuals might have different behavior, but it is the average behavior that the c-index is measuring.

My point also......but.....its still a great site.....and the system is ok i guess.....i just tend to look at each pic enlarged good or bad to make a better judgement......and if i like it i save the image to my hard drive.....thats what i call downloading......which may be wrong...but that's what most people call downloading :)

Well, now that they have read this, they know better! ;-)

haha well said
The problem with counting downloads as you're suggesting (a download is when u save it to your hd or use it as a desktop) is that this would rarely ever happen. I look at a wealth of images a day, and maybe change my desktop once a week, and maybe not to an image from caedes. Images would have 1000 views and like 10 downloads. In fact some would probably have more favorites than downloads o.O
Counting a download as um.. a download, allows you to consider this in the c-index without accounting for the behavior patterns of the members (mostly). If you saw an image you were completely turned off by, I assume you wouldnt waste your time looking at the full size, conversely, if you saw one u liked, you would give it a chance. This should be taken account in the c-index calculation. Although, it is weighted 17% less than it used to be.

and thats the way it should be......a download should not be a simple view....but something that gets put on to your hard drive......8 out of 10 people dont consider a download as you or the moderator do....so i will go with the majority on this one.....the stats are badly skewed.....well i have to go and dowload the NY Times so i can read it....no wait.....ill do it online as a view

The point though, is that there is no difference between downloading an image and just looking at it or downloading it and saving it on your hard drive. Either way the server has to send you the image. What you do with it is totally up to you, and the server has no way to tell what you did with it, so even if we wanted to do it the way you are suggesting we still couldn't.

Oh...............never mind then

Anthony, I think jwicker has a point. I think that most people with even a small understanding of the internet know that when you view a page, you actually download it to your browser cache. However, not withstanding that technical definition, what most people mean when they say 'download' is to actually actively get a file or image and quite deliberately save it to your hard drive with the intent to do something with it.

OK, we're splitting hairs here, but I can see why people would be confused by the term 'downloads'. Not sure where that takes us.

Now, I can create webpages and code in a variety of languages, but nevertheless I am not sure of this: is there some way if we could tell whether someone had actually right-clicked & saved a fullsize image to their drive as opposed to simply opened it? I would have thought that was possible, but maybe I am deluding myself. If it was possible, would it be worth recording that fact somewhere (though, I suppose for existing images that would be too late, hmmm...)?

Perhaps we could simply re-word the term 'downloads' to 'full-size views' or whatever?

what I was saying before is that even if there were a way to record this, a great many members dont save the desktops to their hardrives and probably hardly any nonmembers. it would be a completely useless statistic to record. while an images ability to drive you to view it in fullsize seems like a viable statistic to record and put towards the images score.

So, should it be renamed?

but anyways...Ceades screw up everything with that c- index.... The Ceades concept is bad by the way!! (_I_)!

I've never heard of the ceades concept, but here on caedes, things run fairly well