MediaSynth-F15: 1.2 WYSIWYG

I was surprised at the fact that you found only 32% of people smiling and surprised that as any as 54.5% edited their photos. I would've thought that around 75% of people would be smiling and like 40% of people would have edited their profile pictures. I think your analysis was good because you collected solid data, however I think your conclusion could have been more - well - conclusive because you mainly ended up with 'maybe this was the case'.

I really enjoyed the way you presented the profile pictures. It was very easy to see exactly what you were talking about and perform a little analysis of my own that was backpacked by yours. It also seemed like you chose a good representation of your friends as they seemed to be unique in their own way even though many of them shared many elements.

I think your analysis could have been a little bit more in depth however. "On the top level, people mainly choose their photos because they look good, but is that all?" is essentially what I'm trying to ask.

But I think you did well in that you had 6 different ways in analyzing the data from the pictures you collected.

I like your use of a spreadsheet, as it allowed for the photos to be labelled in multiple categories. I also like how you had a coherent explanation about these Facebook profile pictures, including what purpose they serve and what we should be aware about. Perhaps you could go to into more detail about the process of how these photos are made. Great work!

This is a very engaging format. I also enjoyed how you chose to focus on quality of images- I haven't seen anybody else so far use this parameter to analyze profile pictures. Your pie charts make it very easy to read and reach the same conclusions you did. I would also say, however, that maybe a little more is needed in these conclusions. You could have also talked about what the three results together, rather than individually, say about profile pictures and genders.

I liked your idea of looking at Steam as a sort of social network, as well as the quantities you looked at. Your analysis and conclusion were excellent, very meaty. However, I'd have loved if you had condensed the information into some sort of graphic, as its hard to look at an excel file and realize whats actually going on.

It was a great idea to compare the person's presence in a photo and their activity online. It is interesting to think that no matter how open someone may seem in their photo, it doesn't mean that welcome the entire world into their lives. Even when it seems that people are open through their long list of posts, it doesn't mean that they posts were done themselves or intentionally. People's openness can't be truly communicated through their photos.

Good job.

I liked your explanation of the different kinds of profile pictures, how you pulled out examples and told stories about these pictures. Indeed, it is the story element that draws us into these profile pictures, and make these connections.
I also liked your exploration of the cover photos, as it is also a way for people to express themselves on Facebook. Even though you weren't able to categorize the cover photos, perhaps it would be nice to put them all into one coherent piece, to allow for more analyses to be easily made.

I enjoyed how you examined the message, or rather story, that Facebook users convey through their profile pictures. You went into some detail regarding the different elements that commonly appeared in these pictures, such as an obscured face, presence of friends, and advertisements, and made these people feel 'alive' through their images. The bar graphs were also really clear and well explained. I will admit that I usually think of most selfies as small cries for attention so it was refreshing and stimulating to listen to your view in which these pictures are more like photographs on the wall, pictures that hold special memories or matters of personal importance.

I very much liked your graphics, and I thought that the way you looked at relationships between these quantities was very good, and it shows a clear link to your hypothesis. If I had any criticism, it'd be that the wording and delivery of your conclusion paragraph seemed to be a bit confusing.

I quite like the multiple ways of quantifying data you presented in your project, not only through clustering images but also using a spreadsheet and charts. It presents data in multiple informative ways. The analysis you present is insightful both in the local scope and global scope; I'm glad that you acknowledge the influence of your content toward the profile images of your followers, and it is interesting to see the general trend of changing profiles with the integration of Google Plus with YouTube. Is it possible to show the latter trend across time? You seem to mention a bit about the change that YouTube has gone through, and it would be interesting to see that change presented as data.

Interesting analysis, some of your comments were really hilarious, your post is full of personality.

I liked how you said "people may value their relationships or friendships over easy identification;" it was phrased and explained very well for the group pictures. On the other hand, I personally disagree with the last statement that: "the 'face' is probably one of the least important aspects of the picture," because although the other points are certainly valid, generally people still want to look "good" in their profile picture because essentially it is what represents them on that social media at the very least (though some people do "ugly faces" sometimes...).

I would have liked for you to elaborate more on why people would decide to opt out of a "face" in a profile picture. Sure they want a figurative image or a feeling, but why? Is it because they don't want to post a photo of themselves in public? Is it because they really really like that image?...etc.

I think the ideas you present are very interesting, such as the face being the least important, and I think you can expand them a bit farther. Of the people who have these pictures without their faces, how might their personality play a part in their profile picture? Is there a difference between people who post pictures of just their face or people who post other things? That said, the point you make about Facebook being a SOCIAL media is very strong. From this perspective, the profile picture should perhaps represent more about the person than just their physical appearance, so having other friends/family or using other objects in their picture makes sense.

I really like the way you categorized the profile pictures you got. You made reasonable claims about every category, and I find the "relationship" part to be especially surprising and interesting. But I feel like the reasons you gave on the "goofy"/"friendly" category a little unclear because you aren't persuasive enough to make me think funny photos and selfies can be in the same category. Maybe you can try to elaborate more on this part.

This post had a lot of data taken from profile pictures, including: number of people presented, filters, smiling, date posted, etc. It was organized really well in the google spreadsheet and I thought the graph was a nice touch.
Although the data recorded was very impressive, I felt that the analysis was a bit lacking. I think this post could greatly benefit from more analysis. For example, in your first data point, number of people in profile picture, you mentioned how you expected this and gave a plausible hypothesis why that was so, but the rest of the data didn't have as much analysis aside from stating what you found.

I thought your project was great! You had a lot of data that you cataloged, noted, analyzed and displayed in really informational pie charts. I thought it was really smart to comment about what you thought the data was showing and why you thought it happened.

I also thought your analysis was really good in that you thought about how all the data collected worked together and you thought about what made people choose their profile picture. You also made a really good point about how a lot of spreadable media doesn't immediately jump out to people, like filters.You made some really great points about how profile pictures relate to spreadable media and asking whether taking them and analyzing them is invading their privacy/breaking a copyright. I think you also could have made a point about whether or not profile pictures are a type of brand media. You made a comment about how people pick their profile pictures to represent themselves a better way and to show others certain parts of themselves and what they deem important. Does this make profile pictures media advertisement?

I really like how your analysis is presented visually. Sizing the pictures based on the number of likes they received gives viewers a nice way to see all of the data at once. It would also be interesting to see if different ages or genders are more likely to choose a certain category of profile picture. In addition, since you talk about liking pictures, you could tie this back to the Jenkins reading and participatory culture. The Facebook profile picture is something that one's friends interact with, and so it seems that each person is trying to achieve "spreadability" with their picture. That is, people are trying to encourage participation with the content they post.

Thanks for the feedback! I would say that my more formal analysis was presented toward the top of the project rather than the bottom (above the image of my avatar), and the bottom was more of a series of less coalesced remarks.

I pretty much holds the same thoughts as yours, but in my data, I have a lot more abstract profile photos. What's I don't have in mind is that I didn't realize the "cover page is what matters to the user". So thank you for letting me realize this blind spot you analysis is great.

The framework you chose is very interesting because it reflects what people, or at least the people you are close with, generally like. Shrinking the photos made it easy to see the difference between pictures with many likes and pictures with not so many. It was difficult, however, to see the details in the smaller pictures. Along with that idea, I think another important aspect that could be analyzed is the type of picture that gets liked, such as what is in the pictures, what makes them appealing, and how do pictures without humans compare to pictures with humans. Overall, the conclusion that we like more edited and appealing pictures with humans correlates with the ideas along with class, but I really liked the conclusion that we like pictures because the people themselves are appealing, not just their representation.

I find it interesting how you came to the conclusion that having more people in your profile picture may be an indicator of your desire to flaunt your social nature. In my own project, I found that having more people in your profile picture is actually an uncommon practice, as doing so deflects the attention away from yourself,, and towards people that your audience may not necessarily know. In most cases, this is an undesirable effect. I think it's important, in your case, to analyze who exactly is in the profile picture in addition to the main individual, and how that portrays the individual.

Hi! I loved your project. I have also thought about Steam but I don't have that many friends and I wasn't sure how I would go about it but your project really was amazing. I especially loved the chart about and how you wrote if their profile was private because that actually tells a lot. If I could give one suggestion, I would just talk about the formatting of the chart, like it would be nice if you made the font bigger, or center the text or something, and that would be it.

Using photos from What's App was a clever choice and I liked that these photos were different than those you might see being used as profile photos on different social medias. I really liked your reflection that the purpose of these photos is to clarify who the person is, rather than as a conversation piece (as in Facebook). I was also surprised as you were to see that ratios of male/female and age remained consistent for looking at pictures with and without other people.

I love the bar graph. It's extremely easy to view and understand. Your project is short and sweet, hitting what you wanted to hit. However, I think you could have delved a little more in the analysis. I'm curious about what you think: What could be reasons for people not having filters? Especially on Facebook? What could be reasons that photos with more than one person don't get as many likes? Your project still informed me a lot though. Great job!

I really like that even thought you couldn't find a relationship between the profile picture features and dedication as a gamer, that in itself represented something significant. The steam users didn't need to use their profile picture to display their dedication or personal details. Also by comparing those photos to facebook, it really brought out that contrast.

I like how you grouped your pictures, I think did a good job highlighting how so many of people's profile pictures fall into the same categories, that it is probably quite rare for someone to post a profile picture that breaks those molds.

I agree that you can learn a lot from people's profile pictures, since these pictures are the face of how people choose to represent themselves online. People often will choose to accentuate particular parts of themselves or activities they do in their pictures, which you pointed out through noting how some people incorporated the LGBTQ filters, advertisements for their sororities, etc. Also I like how you also analyzed your own profile pictures as well and noticed the similarities and differences between your pictures and everyone else's (which now I wish I had done myself!). Good job!

I like the project's aim to compare between the profile pictures on Facebook and Tumblr. It seems obvious that one would expect more photos featuring one's self on Facebook than Tumblr, since the purpose of these social media differ greatly in their, say, attachment to the "real world". Perhaps it would have been good also to compare between the level of curation made for one's profile photo on Facebook versus on Tumblr, and - (out of time, unfortunately)

I love how you presented your project using the infographic. It's nicely organized, looks good, and clearly portrays your observations.

Your main question was about what a person's profile picture says about how they want to be seen, and you noticed some really interesting things (photo quality, use of filters, presence of a smile). So what does each of these things say about how someone wants to be seen? For example, what does a high quality photo (as opposed to one of poor quality) say about how the user wants to be seen? And what's a possible explanation for why females had a significantly greater percent with high quality? Overall, you made some great observations and I just wished for a little more explanation of your conclusions!

Tinder was definitely an interesting take on this assignment! I thought you had a fun and funny take on how you categorized them as well. A question I have is "was there much overlap" like were they just black and white in their own category or could the jock also be a hunter? Maybe a bit more in depth analysis of what all of the grouping means and how effective each category is? That is tough though, because it's hard to measure the effecacy of a tinder profile due to the number of matches being private. Maybe you and a group of your friends could judge which guys you thought were "swipe right material" and then there would be some data on which group was the best!

I think that the acknowledgement of the potential biases of the followers of your deviant art profile was good to place at the start of the piece, as it set the tone for what to expect in the subsequent analysis. The list of observations made at the end was very clear, with the bulleted formatting helping keep everything together. That said, there didn't seem to be very in depth analysis of the data, something that I think could have helped the project. Despite this, it was clear what information you wanted to get across, and the piece did a good job in illustrating the social dynamics of deviantArt

It was interesting to see your point of view regarding male and female attitudes toward profile pictures as I have experienced an opposite trend. Your suggested explanation for the trend you observed seemed very logical and plausible. I likewise enjoyed how you categorized the different types of pictures you saw to make for easier analysis. I would have liked to see more in depth analysis of some individual pictures aside from your own, but I believe this project is still good regardless.

The structure is quite clear. Table is very well explained. But "show off" is not the only purpose that people post something. Social media is a platform where people meet each other and tell them what is happening around them. Some people do post sad experiences, but rarely someone will use a sad face as a profile photo. People's emotions are changing every day, but no one will change their profile photo every day. They use a happy and attractive face to express a general emotion. "We should all be optimistic to lives." Sometimes people just want to share something through facebook, but not on the purpose of showing off.

The name of your project immediately caught my eye, and the topic of analysis is aptly quite interesting. Facebook is social media, and to me, I would expect this inverse trend between friends in real life vs. friends on social media. I would think we're limited in how many friends we can make in either dimension. I wonder if the results from your plot--what looks to be a skewed normal distribution--means anything, or if it's just 'normal'?

As a minor criticism, I would like to see labels on the axes of your graph. It took me longer than expected to understand what the values on the x-axis meant. It would help with the flow and clarity of the analysis.

This was just great. The information was presented clearly and in a way that was easy to find, and analyzing the difference between real and imaginary profile pictures was a really good idea.

It appears that you created a single clump of profile pictures but organized them within the clump based on similarity. The animal pictures are in one area while group picture are in another. This was hard to see at first and it was only after reading your explanation that I understood it. I might have liked to see a little bit more separation from the group for each sub group. It was also interesting, your comment on posting people's pictures that you didn't know that well. It almost seems that we should care less about people we don't know as much, but perhaps it was too intimate of an experience for you to do that.

You did a really good job analyzing the breakdown you chose! I think I would have liked to see more than one breakdown, ie. looking at the number of people in the photo, but the analysis you gave seemed pretty spot on. I also think your graphs were a little unclear - at a glance it was pretty tough to get any info from it. A clearer explanation of the category types, separate from the paragraph, might have resolved this I think. On a much more trivial level, I'm not sure 'the results of this assignment didn't surprise me' is a great thing to say, but that's probably not a big deal. Glad to see this assignment got you interested though!

I find it interesting that instead of focusing on what the pictures could mean, for some you focused on the gender. Your conclusion about female gamers is very plausible, and a great analysis of the effect of gender discrimination in the gaming community. The explanation of why users prefer to remain anonymous is also well analyzed, and may be due to the fact that rather than appearing as one's self, people would rather succeed in the image of anonymity so as to rid themselves of the preconceptions of the community.

I would like a deeper analysis of the reasons behind choosing certain anonymous image types, but well done nonetheless.

I really like the way that you visualized all the information in concentric rings -- it was a really interesting way of putting the information together in a readable way. I thought it was interesting how you said that the people from your hometown had less positive profile pictures in general because of how you made connections to them; do you think that those with a "heavy internet/nerd influence" typically are less happy in their profile pictures?

I like how you grouped and then analyzed each group of pictures. It's a very candid way of analyzing the groupings. I especially enjoyed the first page, where you introduced the format of the project and analyzed the reason for the type of photo presented. It seems the format for the other groupings are a little off though. I cannot read the titles and descriptions of the groups, as they are cut off, and what appears to be the start of very sound and interesting analysis is disjointed and cut off. Perhaps some documentation would be useful in seeing how the analysis was cutoff. The analysis looks interesting for the other groups, but I can't glean any meaning from the sentences which are cut off. Also, it appears that the cropping of the photos leads to some mismatching of groups. Was this all one picture beforehand? If so, It would probably be easier to just post the single, long picture and then posting the analysis below rather than cutting some of the groups in half and displaying them one and a half groups at a time.

I love that you have a lot of graphs, since clean visual displays of information are pretty impactful, but I'm fairly certain the labels are off, or some of these graphs haven't yet been properly configured, thus defeating their purpose of easily conveying data. I'd also like to see some further analysis on your results (graphs are great but can't carry the day entirely), but I suppose you may have put that elsewhere. Interesting data; wish I could see where you were going with it.

I think the analysis is amazing. All the charts you made are beautiful and almost cover every aspect of profile pics. Also, I tried several times to put pictures into excel but I didnt make it. How did you do it? I really love the circle charts you make. That presents clearly the percentage of analysis. I think it's gonna be better if you have some words explaining those analysis.

I liked the detail you went in when breaking down the groups of individuals selected. I especially enjoyed the visual comparisons through bar graphs and pie charts. I thought it was a clear and concise way to see the comparisons. Additionally, I thought you made great comments on why you thought these trends were happening. I think one way to improve would to have a cleaner form of blocking out the images not used (such as a white box overlaid on the image), just for aesthetic purposes. Besides that and the typos, the project was very well-detailed.

A fascinating look into how your female Facebook friends portray an "ideal" woman. Although you explained that you don't believe in a single portrayal of a desirable woman, what made you choose those adjectives? How did you decide how to categorize the profile pictures of your friends using those words?

I liked how you mentioned that everyone is smiling in their photos. Actually, there are a few photos of people who aren't smiling. Why do you think you didn't notice this? Or if you did notice this, why did you choose to ignore it? There is another belief that women should always be smiling, and perhaps there is something inherent in your decision or your unconscious decision to immediately describe everyone in their photos as smiling.

This was an interesting topic to discuss, and it was great to see how you talked in depth about how your female friend's Facebook profile photos displayed certain traits, but not in the traditional way people might see them in.

I really liked the initial way you presented the images, the diagram is very well organized and interesting to look at. However, I'm completely sure I agree that a "smiley" picture means a "positive" picture, and think there could be more criteria for categorizing pics as "positive" or "negative". It wouldn't be such a problem but it's the focus of your analysis.

I think focusing on the mood of the profile pictures was a good idea and I thought the data sheet was very clear and informative. There could have been more analysis of the reasons behind the different moods in the profile pictures. But the format of the project where you have to scroll through the profile pictures before getting to the analysis was interesting and made you actually look at the profile pictures being analyzed, which is kind of like social media in that you have to look through a bunch of stuff before you get to what you actually care about.

Hello!
I agree with almost all of your observations, there are a few technical points I'd like to address:
First, what do you mean when you say that changing profile pictures on Facebook is an "indirect" way of sharing important milestones with friends? In addition, if WeChat users attempt to adapt to American culture by revealing themselves through their profile pictures, why do you think their WeChat profile pictures still veil who they are? Finally, I'm sure that "random pictures" is not an accurate way to describe the "doodles" that people use as profile pictures instead of their faces. What might be the meaning of that particular "doodle," and how does that represent the individuality of the person?

This project seemed to be comprised of 2 parts along with an explanation. The idea of organizing pictures by likes was very unique and interesting. One thing I wasn't sure on was whether or not the photos were organized by likes within each type or just at the end. It would be interesting to see them organized by like. I would also wonder if likes correlated to the type of friends a person has, greek affiliated, club friends or class friends. Overall, I enjoyed this work and I thought you took a very interesting approach to it!

Hi! I really really liked your analysis. It first showed a general overview about how the ratios are, and then looked at it as a timeline and it was very well done by how you showed the graphs. The only thing that confused me was that you said "The only male had a picture of himself with someone else." right after a chart and it took me a second to understand what it meant. Other than that, your project also has a good cover photo since it shows what you are talking about; profile pictures in the past, and then in the future.

I liked how you sought to find a numeric ratio of male to female profile photos over time, but it seems that this data does not have a lot of meaning considering that your pool of male friends to pull from is smaller to begin with. You did do a nice job of analyzing this data and categorizing it in terms of self, self+, and object photos. I think in general, this study of media would be more interesting if you focused on how your close friends choose to represent themselves, rather than on how the people you've been friends with have changed.

Fun writing style and casual representation of experience with dA. It seems that the project was started without a particular goal in mind to analyse something - instead, it looks to be more of a "let's see what we can observe from this set of images" sort of thing. Because of this, the project seems to feature more breadth than depth in its analysis. If I had to make a suggestion, I'd say it'd be nice to have some numbers accompanying some of the claims (such as that female watchers tend to have non-human designs as icons, etc..). I would also have enjoyed more elaboration on each of the observations made, but as mentioned above it seems like the project was just going for a more passive learning experience.

This piece did a very good job communicating the various axis's along which it measured the profile pictures of tumblr users. The images used did a good job in illustrating the distribution of the profile images which helped the subsequent analysis. Something I found interesting was when analyzing the profile pictures, the author of this piece talked about the content of the blogs without giving any clear examples. Statements like "Self-representational images are often used by people uncomfortable with a very personal online persona, as well as those opting for a humorous effect." could have been reinforced by a casual screen shot or some other statement from the blogger. In all, the clean presentation of the content supplemented by graphs helped clearly get the point across and it supported the analysis made by the author.

I really like the analysis you put into your work. You really brought out the relationship between the profile pictures and the person. All your claims were interesting, but maybe bring out more evidence to support it. For example, a lot of the claims were your own opinion, so maybe bring in a some friends to analyze the photos with you to get a bigger sample.

Given that profile pictures are meant to represent an individual, it's interesting that a majority of the profile pictures you analyzed were not of the user themselves. This is very different from the profile pictures on Facebook; it's interesting to see how the form of media (in this case Steam vs. Facebook) affects how people express themselves, and I think you could tie this back to the McLuhan reading. The form and purpose of the media platform is changing how people express themselves.

I really love this project. The analysis gives readers a comprehensive understanding about what do people what to advertise themselves. I really love how you separate categories of profile pics because each of the category represent a kind of intension behind those pictures. Also, I like how you analyze why not many people use relationship as their profile pics. That's a new perspective from my point of view.

I think you can post some of the profile pics you collect. That's gonna be more persuasive.

I thought it was interesting how we both checked how many people were smiling in their profile pictures and both got about the same percentage (30%) for that statistic. I was just as surprised as you were that not as many people were smiling in their pictures as I had originally thought, since I was at least expecting most people would want to give off a happy or fun image of themselves from their profile picture.
Overall, good analysis on the pictures and I agree with your conclusion that people pick their pictures based on "how do I look" as opposed to "what will people think of my character," which I think is a valid point that most people overlook.

I like the idea of anonymity with Tumblr while comparing social-ness/people per picture for Facebook. However, with regards to anonymity, I feel as though McLuhan's points about privacy and everyone being held accountable for their actions are relevant as well. For example, using the anonymity of Tumblr to escape from a lack of privacy. Also, you mentioned that the number of people per photo was greater on Facebook -- I would have liked to see some analysis of that. What was the average number of people per photo, etc.? For my project, I ended up with a different result from yours. Rather than anonymity, I focused on what is important to people. It's an interesting take on what you found from the photos.

I thought the presentation of your project was very good. Th initial image quickly categorizes the pics and go into more detail below. You also very clearly explained what each category tend towards and why people tended towards that category. I'm very familiar with Tumblr so I didn't completely understand the set-up you were talking about, but you defined all the important points which made your analysis easy to follow.

I like how you analyzed the profile pictures in terms of both age and gender, and then brought both pieces together. You use of the graphs was really clear. I also liked how you gave possible explanations for the trends you observed, like how older males are more likely to use a selfie as their profile picture because of their success. What other reasons could there be for these trends? One small thing - there are a few typos that made it a little difficult to read. Make sure to proofread :)

It's interesting that you think the profile photo with two person in the it can affect the way other users' communication with the user. But doesn't the Whatsapp have profile names to help you identify who you are texting with? In that case, I may consider the two-person profile photo has different purpose, say memorizing a great friendship.

That was really interesting! I liked the comparison with the old photos of women.
I especially liked the idea of analyzing the comments on the photos, and the wordle was a great way to represent that, but I would've liked to hear more about what the significance of those words are, or maybe which words were used more on which category and what that might mean.

Thanks for sharing!

I thought the analysis of how culture affects how people use social media was a unique perspective. I liked the comparison between Facebook and Wechat, but it would have been nice if there was some visual representation of the comparison. I also thought the analysis for the reasons behind the peaks in changes in profile picture were pretty interesting. I never noticed that many people were changing their profile picture around the same time, but the commentary makes sense that people want to look good on social media when they know that many new people will be looking at their profile.

I think you did a very good job representing the data that you had found. The graph and the collage of pictures was a good touch that got your point across and added a lot to the project as a whole. I also found it interesting how you did outside research to look into what others believed affected Facebook profile images. I also liked how you kept in mind the sample size but still commented on what you believed going in and out of the analysis. I think the only thing that might be needed is slightly more reflection into the data but other than that the project was really good.

I think you made a lot of relevant and useful analysis from your data. I also agree with your reasoning regarding the site mechanics tending to discourage impersonal avatars, as I had a similar finding in my own project. I'm a bit confused as to why you chose to discuss profile names, and I would have liked to see a little more process in your documentation, but overall, I think you satisfied the endgoal of the assignment.

I liked your use of Tinder; it was a very creative choice. Your description also seemed to be the average mindset when viewing such a high volume of pictures. I would have liked to have seen more in the way of analysis of what this meant for Tinder as a social media and as to why you thought these men would choose these photos to represent themselves. Additionally, I would like to hear your perspective on how the existence of Tinder possibly shapes people's perspective of others or of themselves. Overall, well done, and well formatted.

I love your analysis of the data. It is simple, succinct, and clearly portrayed by the data chart you presented. However, I would be great if you had some form of documentation besides just written words of your project. Perhaps a screenshot of the sorted pictures? I also like the questions that you posted at the end, but perhaps you could try to answer them yourself using the project? Though, the data chart is a little confusing to look at. What parameters are you using to create the averages?

I love how the profile pictures are spaced out in a grid, then used a subset of those pictures for each portion of your analysis below it. As for the portion where you said that nearly every profile picture was edited, I just wondered how you came to that number. A fair bit of the pictures included in that section didn't appear to be altered in any way. It must have been hard to tell if and how filters had been applied to each photo.