[DanBC]

(http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43240059/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/m...)

> Mining data from 35 million Flickr photos, scientists at Cornell University made some surprising discoveries: Not only did the world's most photographed cities (and the most captured landmark in each) emerge, but also so did the most common angles for shooting each place.

There are some American cities in the top twenty-five; and some Californian cities there; and San Francisco is listed at number 3, but for Union Square, not the Golden Gate Bridge.

This[1] AOL page has another list of US sights. (http://news.travel.aol.com/2009/08/27/must-snaps-americas-mo...) - they say it's the Coit Tower.

[1] A bafflingly bad page! Here's the tiny text-reading box on my display. (http://imgur.com/aRPqWr5)

[dfc]

Why did you say "there are some American cities...and San Francisco is listed at number 3" and not mention:

  1st most photographed city: New York
  Landmark: Empire State Building.

Updated:

Found the source[1], the golden gate bridge did not make their list of top 7 in san francisco. Which could be due to the methodology but it is important to note that there is a problem of selection bias in the article, which may artificially inflate SF's prominence. Its worth pointing out that for NYC landmarks the apple store was ranked higher than liberty island (AKA statue of liberty). Francophiles can rest easy, the Eifel Tower crushed the competition.

[1] https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~dph/papers/photomap-www09.pdf

[uptown]

"> Mining data from 35 million Flickr photos"

I'm not sure Flickr can be considered an accurate representation of the majority of photographers.