wow it's hard to believe such amazing work gets overlooked. But then, with the amount of media being thrown at us, it's not surprising we become numb and don't appreciate the good stuff quite as much... too bad..
You could do your part by faving these deviations, faving this article so more people can see it, featuring these works yourself, suggesting them as DDs, etc.
The people have the power to change what's on front page by faving, sharing, supporting what's good...as opposed to faving and supporting MLP stuff. Front page wouldn't be so full of crap if we faved less of the crap and more of the good.
Though I agree that there's a flaw in dA's algorithm frequently leading to crap on front page, there definitely seems to be a flaw in the way the people operate as well, in particular the way the under-appreciated community support each other.
People complain when popular works get the features, favs and DDs. They suggest that under-appreciated works should be the types of works that everyone works harder to help support (which I couldn't agree more). And yet when under-appreciated works get featured like this, many of these same people aren't fav-ing, featuring, or suggesting these under-appreciated works as DDs...they aren't doing what they say everyone else should do.
My last feature was on works with under 15 favs. The journal was viewed near 2000 times by watchers and passer-byers. Yet only 6 fav-ed the journal to try to get more people to see those works and most of the works featured only managed to get to ~30 favs.
So in short, I'm not surprised how many of these works still have under 50 favs. But I'm not sure why either.
I think we all like to talk a bigger game than we are willing to play. I saw your last poll about DDs and it really blew my mind how many people said that they would suggest if they new how... but I'm sure all those same people at one time or another complained about how the quality of DDs has gone down and how they think the system by which they are chosen should change. I don't understand how they know how it works and can complain while not knowing how it works at the same time.
I suggested - [link] but I'm sure it won't get accepted because of who runs that category and the kind of things they usually feature. That's the part of it I don't like. I've suggested quite a few and only two have been accepted. I'm not saying I have the greatest eye and that they should all be accepted but it baffles me some of the things I see get chosen over it. Then I had this whole thing with one of the mods because I suggested three separate pieces from the category that they managed but they told me that they weren't going to accept because it wasn't actually a photo that belonged in that category. It made me upset because everyone knows deviants purposefully put things in the wrong category and nothing is done about it. You can't simultaneously do nothing and complain about it.
Sometimes I really wonder, why there are so much great artist, and so less favs. That's the problem of electronic viewers like PC, iPad, iPhone...etc. People watch too fast...aahh great picture...aahh I know, aha, no this picture I don't like. With a print, you can "feel" the picture, watch sometimes a much bigger version and so the photo is much powerful than in a 800x600 resolution. When you watch in a picture book, you don't turn the page in miliseconds. No, you take the same, let the picture breathe, let the picture grow, search for the unexpected. Here in DA sometimes the time is too fast. And so I find it absolutely great, to give these pictures a second chance.
I think with dA, there are simply too many pictures. Most people aren't willing to sift through everything to find these under-appreciated works and instead rely on dA's ranking algorithm to present them with what's "good" (ie. what's on front page), which has lots of inherit issues in itself.
The first side, when I start my browser with DA is the deviation side with the newest photos...so I can always see new stuff. I have found so many cool artists. Sometimes I begin to watch the pictures from interesting artists. But sometimes I haven't enough time, to watch all their pictures, because they have 15, 20, 30 or more sides of photos. It could take some weeks, or months, until I have seen it all.