Pixelfed[1] is a free, federated and brilliant instagram alternative for photographers!
You could spend those 5usd/month on hosting your own managed instance or just donating/supporting free, meaningful communities.
Glass – Photo sharing app and community
111–120 of 135 posts
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#112I don't get how a pro photo app is supposed to be mobile-only and subscription-gated. One of the greatest things about flickr is that I can embed it almost anywhere, even hotlinking on my blog or on forums, and anyone, anywhere can see it on any device. (And if I pay, they can see a 6k version, served on the web, not through a download link.) I am really, really into photography but I do not have any interest in view…
The very second photo on the above link is an example of a shared photo on the glass.photo website?
I think the app is required to manage your collection but it appears you can absolutely share links publicly.
Eg. https://glass.photo/om/3lyGawR7MzJx2M46BMqpsV
^That worked fine?
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#113Does it interact with the open web? Are there examples of public-facing profiles one might see? As Instagram closes down its interoperability with the open web even further (try visiting pages in an Incognito window -- sign-in is rapidly required), it opens the door to photo-sharing sites that are better net-citizens.
Oddly enough, one of their screenshots shows a URL[1], but that url doesn't actually work if you go to it. https://glass.photo/royhandy/e8ewjkla
They do have valid links further down the homepage though. https://glass.photo/om/3lyGawR7MzJx2M46BMqpsV
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#114I don't get how a pro photo app is supposed to be mobile-only and subscription-gated. One of the greatest things about flickr is that I can embed it almost anywhere, even hotlinking on my blog or on forums, and anyone, anywhere can see it on any device. (And if I pay, they can see a 6k version, served on the web, not through a download link.) I am really, really into photography but I do not have any interest in view…
Maybe the actual target audience is people who think they're pros when they aren't? Sounds about right for both photographers and consumer electronics enthusiasts.
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not mobile-only, iphone-only. This is a good example of how ios is a seperate market and Apple has the monopoly.
It's wise to launch on only one platform to start, focus on there, learn, and then launch on alternative platforms. Particularly if you're developing everything native. Are there any non-Apple created apps with large user base that are truly iOS only? There probably are, but as an android user, I don't know.
> It's wise to launch on only one platform to start, focus on there, learn, and then launch on alternative platforms. Particularly if you're developing everything native.
Particularly when the app in question is more technically demanding and has greater need to use platform facilities.
If it's a bog standard CRUD app, that might be reasonable to take multiplatform on launch day, but on the other hand something like touch friendly version of Final Cut Pro would be much more challenging to have both iOS and Android versions of right out of the gate.
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#116I don't get how a pro photo app is supposed to be mobile-only and subscription-gated. One of the greatest things about flickr is that I can embed it almost anywhere, even hotlinking on my blog or on forums, and anyone, anywhere can see it on any device. (And if I pay, they can see a 6k version, served on the web, not through a download link.) I am really, really into photography but I do not have any interest in view…
The very second photo on the above link is an example of a shared photo on the glass.photo website? I think the app is required to manage your collection but it appears you can absolutely share links publicly. Eg. https://glass.photo/om/3lyGawR7MzJx2M46BMqpsV ^That worked fine?
And their web sharing link works also without JS, which is quite uncommon for image sharing sites and a very nice find!
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#117I really, really don't understand why I have to put my self in the position to be censured, scanned or to not have control over the UX. It is 2021, hosting is dirt cheap, there are proven ways to create a blog and share with your audience. Paying to someone for the "privilege" of participation is not valuable. Investing in your own brand is valuable. If you have social network needs use established platforms for shar…
> I really, really don't understand why I have to put my self in the position to be censured, scanned or to not have control over the UX. People said the same when YouTube became a thing. > And one more thing: Making a service iPhone only is not cool. Apple is not cool anymore. Fully agree here.
The difference about before and now is clear.
Cost of self-hosting is low and increased algorithmic control over content is making UX unbearable for artistic use cases.
That is my point. It is obvious that content silos will be monetized and explored to the infinity, but there is a point where "the common denominator" sanitized content is barely bearable. :)
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
It certainly appears to be. That's a bit confusing, however. Every example photograph rather prominently notes the camera, not phone, it was taken with. The features seem primarily useful for camera-and-raw-processing photographers. The website doesn't seem to indicate that it's iPhone only, but the feedback section, and the lack of any way to log in or sign up other than the link to the iOS App Store, certainly sugg…
It's not a great workflow but everyone serious does it with instagram, too (even with phone photos, doing post on the phone is awful).
But that's the only way to use instagram, and I don't think it's great workflow.
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#119I don't get how a pro photo app is supposed to be mobile-only and subscription-gated. One of the greatest things about flickr is that I can embed it almost anywhere, even hotlinking on my blog or on forums, and anyone, anywhere can see it on any device. (And if I pay, they can see a 6k version, served on the web, not through a download link.) I am really, really into photography but I do not have any interest in view…
I used a few Flickr embeds on my site and it reminded me of all the promise of composability and interoperability in the early web. I miss it.
> promise of composability and interoperability in the early web. I miss it.
Then avoiding embeds altogether and choosing hyperlinks is the way to go. Came to this realization after having to remove embeds from what was a cool platform to begin with and later turning out to be soul sucking privacy nightmare.
Re: Glass – Photo sharing app and community
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not mobile-only, iphone-only. This is a good example of how ios is a seperate market and Apple has the monopoly.
This seems like a good example of how some devs treat ios like a separate market and lose out on a significant portion of the potential user pie.
Perhaps they have a reason to make that decision when it’s their money on the line, like ‘that’s where the people that actually spend money are’.
If you want to vote with your feet, buy apps on your platform and spend money through it.