Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Slick – Carousel

kenwheeler.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 119 posts

Re: Slick – Carousel

#71

Post by shanacarp »

ig1 wrote: post #33
yummyfajitas wrote: post #9

I don't wish to engage in standard HN negativity, but I'd like to suggest that you should probably don't want to use a carousel at all most of the time. From the user's perspective, a carousel is just a random image. You'll get more conversions if you choose the best image instead of a random one. http://www.bayesianwitch.com/blog/2014/carouselsarebadforcon...

The maths looks wrong; the distribution of clicks is only relevant if the total number of clicks stays the same. Essentially a carousel gives you a "second-bite" at your customer, i.e. the second image is a chance to convert those customers who haven't already been converted by the first image. Imagine you have two images one which converts at 40% and one which converts at 20% - but each image converts completely dif…

This assumes one important problem that sees to not be common - that the person viewing the carousel will stick around long enough to view the next choice (or all the choices)

In an ideal world, what you should do instead is parametric optimization of some sort instead of a carousel - so you can hit that other 20%

Re: Slick – Carousel

#72

Post by shanacarp »

psychometry wrote: post #15
yummyfajitas wrote: post #9

I don't wish to engage in standard HN negativity, but I'd like to suggest that you should probably don't want to use a carousel at all most of the time. From the user's perspective, a carousel is just a random image. You'll get more conversions if you choose the best image instead of a random one. http://www.bayesianwitch.com/blog/2014/carouselsarebadforcon...

I honestly can't think of an instance where a carousel is the best UI element to use, yet everyone requests them. Why?

Because handling internal politics at BigCos can be very difficult. Also, for many departments, the way they are judged on success can differ from other departments doing similar activities.

If you want to see a really horrible example of that kind of politics getting in the way of customers and users - SearsCo

Re: Slick – Carousel

#73

Post by shanacarp »

ollysb wrote: post #26
psychometry wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly can't think of an instance where a carousel is the best UI element to use, yet everyone requests them. Why?

I think it's safe to say they're pretty useful for artists and photographers to show collections of their work.

edgecase

Re: Slick – Carousel

#74

Post by ig1 »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #63
ig1 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The maths looks wrong; the distribution of clicks is only relevant if the total number of clicks stays the same. Essentially a carousel gives you a "second-bite" at your customer, i.e. the second image is a chance to convert those customers who haven't already been converted by the first image. Imagine you have two images one which converts at 40% and one which converts at 20% - but each image converts completely dif…

Sure, anything could happen. As Shana says: It is totally possible that there are edge cases where we are wrong. While we’ve personally performed split tests between carousels and their elements and always came up with an individual slide (rather than the whole carousel) as the highest revenue generating source, it is possible that there will be some cases where a carousel is better for conversions. To go with your e…

The problem with your calculation it assumes that people who are likely to get converted by the first image wait around for the second image and get "unconverted".

A good intuitive way to think about it is this: if you're only showing the second carousel image to people who the first image failed to convert then there's zero down-side.

In practice there are some users who would convert if shown the first image for longer who you'll lose by rotating to another image, but that's what you need to measure to decide if it's worth having a carousel.

Re: Slick – Carousel

#76

Post by shanacarp »

captainmuon wrote: post #61
yummyfajitas wrote: post #9

I don't wish to engage in standard HN negativity, but I'd like to suggest that you should probably don't want to use a carousel at all most of the time. From the user's perspective, a carousel is just a random image. You'll get more conversions if you choose the best image instead of a random one. http://www.bayesianwitch.com/blog/2014/carouselsarebadforcon...

Not everybody is concerned about "conversions". If I'd get to redo the public website of our research institute, I'd add a carousel, because it looks cool and modern, and it allows you to showcase the work of different people without favoring one person by giving them the "best space". And even if you have something to sell, it might be valuable to "wow" your potential customer, and to give them the impression that y…

I used to volunteer with my local college club. During that time, the school won a webby.

Probably one of the most undisclosed facts about the schools website: beyond students using it, they probably tested the hell out of "does it drive donations"

Even nonprofits* have conversions to worry about - they take in donor and grant money. Making sure the site is clear in order to do so is way more important than cool

*I can actually name a few nonprofits that do not have this model, but thats because they are secretly for profits if you look through their budgets. They tend to exist in sectors providing services on behalf of the federal government to say the disabled. They don't need to worry about conversions.

Re: Slick – Carousel

#77

Post by shanacarp »

ig1 wrote: post #74
yummyfajitas wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, anything could happen. As Shana says: It is totally possible that there are edge cases where we are wrong. While we’ve personally performed split tests between carousels and their elements and always came up with an individual slide (rather than the whole carousel) as the highest revenue generating source, it is possible that there will be some cases where a carousel is better for conversions. To go with your e…

The problem with your calculation it assumes that people who are likely to get converted by the first image wait around for the second image and get "unconverted". A good intuitive way to think about it is this: if you're only showing the second carousel image to people who the first image failed to convert then there's zero down-side. In practice there are some users who would convert if shown the first image for lo…

the downside is they may bounce instead of waring out the time.

Re: Slick – Carousel

#78

Post by yummyfajitas »

ig1 wrote: post #74
yummyfajitas wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, anything could happen. As Shana says: It is totally possible that there are edge cases where we are wrong. While we’ve personally performed split tests between carousels and their elements and always came up with an individual slide (rather than the whole carousel) as the highest revenue generating source, it is possible that there will be some cases where a carousel is better for conversions. To go with your e…

The problem with your calculation it assumes that people who are likely to get converted by the first image wait around for the second image and get "unconverted". A good intuitive way to think about it is this: if you're only showing the second carousel image to people who the first image failed to convert then there's zero down-side. In practice there are some users who would convert if shown the first image for lo…

30% is avg of 20% and 40%. Its the conversion rate of a random person who doesn't stick around long enough to see the second image.

I don't think we really disagree - you should test the carousel, and cases where it wins will be edge cases usually.

Re: Slick – Carousel

#79

Post by japhyr »

Trufa wrote: post #59
psychometry wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly can't think of an instance where a carousel is the best UI element to use, yet everyone requests them. Why?

Photographers displaying pictures that don't want to lose vertical space is clearly one. In our website we use it for instructional photo succession, I think it works pretty good, I'm open to suggestions (other than videos) to other UI elements that would work better for that that purpose. http://getfinn.com/#instructions

I have never seen your product before, and those four images give me a very clear sense of how it works. I would much rather click through a series of images like this than play a video, even if the video is short.
Post reply on HN