Yep. By giving your opinion (voting) on other people's photos, you earn feedback on your own.
As a timesaver and to get more feedback faster, there's also the option to buy Credits instead of voting.
When you start a test on a photo, other logged-in Photofeeler users (within your selected voter demographic) can see that photo on the voting page in order to give their feedback.
When the test is ended, the photo becomes entirely private again.
No. Your photos can only be seen by other logged-in users while you're running a test.
No. Every photo Photofeeler publishes for demo or marketing purposes is with explicit permission.
Photofeeler does conduct research internally. This can mean a variety of things: having internal employees or contractors tag your photos for your gender, publicly sharing numbers or statistics of which your data may be a part, things of that nature. Never anything personal.
Wouldn't someone need to know me to accurately gauge my pictures and give good feedback?
Actually, no. It's the opposite. People who know you are too biased to offer useful feedback.
Our most high-stakes profile pictures (e.g. business, dating) are intended to be viewed by strangers. So to get them right, you need to know what they say about you out of context.
Sure — without prior knowledge about you — someone might get a totally wrong impression. But that is the purpose of Photofeeler: when your picture isn't coming across right to strangers, Photofeeler lets you know that so you can avoid using it online.
On a related note, if you could give Photofeeler voters lots of context (e.g. "This picture is supposed to be silly"), they would become biased and cease to be helpful. For more on this subject, see this article.
Photofeeler's own have written artificial intelligence for some of the world's largest companies.
The fact is, the way we interpret each other's faces is one of the most complex mental processes, and the field hasn't yet succeeded in bottling every bit of nuance involved.
What Photofeeler currently does with artificial intelligence, however, is monitor vote quality, detect all manners of voter fraud in real time, and use sophisticated score distribution analysis — accounting for factors like individual voter styles — to optimize the accuracy of test results. The consequence is statistical accuracy far beyond what a small number of votes could normally provide.
So get reliable results based on the foundation of real people's feedback now. And as the field of artificial intelligence progresses, so will the capabilities of the Photofeeler platform.
There's a lot of reasons why Photofeeler uses trait-based testing rather than asking voters to choose their favorite photo.
All that said, this system is much more complex to build and run. (A "pick A or B" system can, for instance, collect 3 clicks and declare Photo B the winner, even in cases where those 3 clicks were from people who always click on Photo B.)
The Photofeeler team has always believed in doing photo testing the right way — not the easy way.
Nope. Thanks to sophisticated artificial intelligence, bad votes are detected and thrown out in real time.
As soon as some variation of voter fraud is committed (for instance, a user exhibits careless voting behavior), Photofeeler starts throwing out these opinions so they never reach the photo owner.
If low quality voting persists, the voter receives a warning and is told that their votes will receive a decreasing amount of Karma as long as they continue to be unusable.
Voters who continue to give low quality votes have become banned from Photofeeler altogether.
This is bad news for someone who wants to game their way to feedback on their photos. The good news is, since activating these particular algorithms, low vote quality is basically nonexistent.