I've specified my gallery settings so that I go straight from the thumbnail to the full-sized image, rather than loading a Mini-Me on the way.    It may be that I am benefitting from a global site-change and not from my own modification at all, but, one way or another, that part seems to be working OK, when I browse the new entries in the galleries.

In the statistics for each  picture in the gallery are figures for  number of times viewed, number of times viewed today and number of times viewed full-size (among others).   Loading the image full-size does not appear to update the "Full-sized view" number, even if the page is re-loaded.   I am pretty sure that all images get loaded at full-size in my browser, since I have double-checked this. 

Is this "Full-sized view" counter still functioning?   I'd be more than happy if it weren't, because I see precious little justification for a "Thumbnail Mk.II", in the first place, but, if it isn't even reporting accurate statistics,  I can see even less justification for it.

Yes, I have been noticing the statistics aren't reporting properly at all for the full view counter, and haven't since it was implemented. With all that's going on lately, I'm sure that it will be resolved soon.

An even bigger mess is the search function in the galleries...it's just a mess and doesn't pull up anything close to what I'm looking for. I'm pretty much just sitting back until all of this is fixed completely for near full functionality. Just too many numerous bugs and gliches and changes taking place at this time and it's appearing to cause quite a few members to hang in the shadows until the real deal is in place.  

It's a lot like remodeling a house; everything is in disorder and not quite where it needs to be, but it will reach the mark eventually. In the meantime, I'll be staying at a hotel! LOL!

Quote -  In the meantime, I'll be staying at a hotel! LOL!

ROFLMAO 

Thanks for the info, I'll get with the programmers regarding this to get you an accurate response.

i had noticed this too,but thought that quite a few people may not of seen the personel preference announcement,so still don't know that you can adjust your options to view full-sized!! also there are many people that come here,that don't have galleries or store items,and just go about not leaving comments and just adding images/artists to their favs,without leaving any comments when they do!!! so people like that,who can't be bothered to write a few encouraging words,i would doubt have ever bothered to read about the re-sizing thing!!!!! i guess you need to know if someone hasn't changed their options,whether their default settings override your upload preference!!!

If someone has left their personal preference to see an image resized, it will not increment the full-size counter, because if they want it only seen resized, it will show it to them resized regardless of your preference upon upload. This is not a malfunction of the statistics script. And there was a malfunction in statistics a while back, but this was cleared up a couple of weeks ago and scripts run to repair all the data. Statistics are accurate now, except for some views missing WHILE the images were being converted, which cannot be restored. N

Well, I think you are saying that, if an image is not viewed full-size, then the " Full-size Views" counter doesn't get incremented.   I am talking about what happens when I view pictures with my preferences set to  "Display images full-size regardless of artist preference" (I love the idea that some artists would really rather that one didn't look at their pictures full-size).

So I find a nice Terragen scene, say, that someone has recently uploaded and it opens at full size.   At this point, the "Full-size Views" counter ought to be increased.   Hard to tell whether or not it has been, but if I close the picture and then click on it again in the gallery, surely then I should see the counter incremented ?   The fact is that I don't.

I agree with vince3 that many people probably don't notice that they are looking at a reduced version of the picture and are unaware of their own gallery options, so that the total number of views will always outnumber the ""Full-size Views" to some extent.     I just don't believe the statistics on display.   

i don't want to be taken out of context here so i shall clarify what i meant!!!! when you log in to rendo' you notice there are 1000 surfers online!!! at least 200 of those surfers at any given time,are going to be members that don't have galleries!!! but they go through the galleries picking favs but not commenting!!! those members are not ever likely to of ever seen image resizing options!!! as they don't have the time to leave comments!!and they have never uploaded anything!!! so they probally have the re-sized image presented to them!! and are more likely not to "view full-sized" as they have seen the picture and decided it's not worth clicking on!!!they don't have time to comment so why would they!!!! those viewers i think would be the reason why you don't get the full-sized stats!!!!!!!!!

would be interesting to know if everyone that viewed an image, had their oprions set to view full-size,and the artist had uploaded it to show full-size!!! whether all those views count as full-size views!! or whether you actually have to click on it (to open a new window)to get the full-size stat!!!!! having said that,personally i can't see any use to that statistic!!! the other stats i like but that one just doesn't seem either interesting or usefull info!!!!!!!!!!

If it's telling the truth (which I doubt), it means that a lot of pictures are being viewed mainly in reduced form.   Somebody who doesn't make the effort to view the full-sized picture isn't really qualified to comment on it (either favourably, or otherwise).   Perhaps, the option to comment ought to be disabled until the image is displayed at full size.

Quote - Perhaps, the option to comment ought to be disabled until the image is displayed at full size.

That would make the viewing options for members pretty much a moot point.

I suspect that, right now, the viewing options are pretty much terra incognita for quite a few members.    And what, actually, is the default setting of the options (plenty of members, I suspect, never visit their personal options)?    If they don't know that they are viewing images at reduced size, that would seem to be a deficiency of the site.   As I said, though, I fail to see how someone who has looked at a picture, but only at a reduced version, is in a position honestly to rank it or comment upon it.

AFAIK, the default setting for image viewing is the resized option. However I dont understand why you would say that for those members who do not wish to, or those who are 'unable' to view images at the full size {and some are quite large} should not be allowed to comment or rate an image that they have viewed.?

Precisely because they haven't viewed it properly.   OK, to take an admittedly extreme example, if a new biography of Rembrandt took all of its illustrations from the postcards in various galleries, rather than from the paintings themselves, would anyone take it seriously?   I was browsing the gallery here earlier and found  a very good C4D image (although no Rembrandt, strikingly good all the same).  My settings are defined to maximise the picture, so what I saw was the picture, as the artist intended it to be seen, and I left a comment.   I felt obliged to do so, because it was a good picture (although I admit that it was a decidedly banal effort on my part , but at least it expressed my approbation).   If my browser settings, plus my gallery options. had dictated that  the image be displayed at a reduced size, masking much detail, I might have felt less compelled to comment and might even have had a diametrically opposite view of the piece.

To return to the original theme of this thread...  When I opened the aforementioned C4D picture at full size, the "Full-sized View" counter remained at zero.   QED.   When I clicked on the scene, just to make sure (and an identically-sized image predictably opened in a new window), the "Full-sized View" counter still remained resolutely rooted in double-nothings.   QED.   There was no change from re-loading the page, either.   QED.

I note, from re-reading the comments of the site's Professional Optimist, that "This is not a malfunction of the statistics script".    So he didn't say, in terms, that the stats bore any relation to reality, merely implied that everything was fine, OR that any errors were somebody else's fault.  

Hmmm...Ok, well altho I dont think the ability to comment, due to image size specs, is likely to change..I will let the programmers know there is a problem with the full size view not changing once clicked on..will direct them to this thread so they can see what you explained with the image you spoke of.

Well, I'll ready myself for another broadside from Dr. Pangloss, then.

Perhaps you just need to refresh the page to clear your browser's cache.

Set your preferences to view resized regardless of artist preferences.  Go find an image that you know will be resized upon initial viewing.  Click on it for full-size.  Boom, the view full size counter updates.  Works every time.  The full size counter will NOT update (nor should it) if you have your preferences set to view full size regardles of artist preference, only the top view counter will advance as a viewed image. The full size counter only updates when some has their preferences set to view reduced, THEN chooses to view full size because they find it worthy.

Therefore, the conclusions you can draw are:

Most people view full size via their preferences, therefore full size counts are meaningless;

Most people have never set their preferences and don't know that they can view full size as a default and aren't brilliant enough to click the image for a full size view;

Most people who choose to view reduced don't find your image worthy of a full size view or are limited in bandwidth (dial-up)

Nic tried to explain this above.

There ya go.

Most people have never set their preferences and don't know that they can view full size as a default and aren't brilliant enough to click the image for a full size view;

They are typically brilliant enough, but may not be aware or choose not to becuase it is an extra bit of effort.

Which doesn't explain why they chose to implement it that way, but, eh, what the hell.

Quote - Most people view full size via their preferences, therefore full size counts are meaningless; Most people have never set their preferences and don't know that they can view full size as a default and aren't brilliant enough to click the image for a full size view;

Or most people have never modified their preferences, therefore full size counts are meaningless.