81–90 of 102 posts
Thank God we have a competitive market for this sort of stuff now so that I haven't had a reason to visit Flickr in years.
Yahoo, which once held great promise, seems to have become the company that buys things and fails with them. Some examples off the top of my head: Konfabulator (Yahoo Widgets), Geocites, Delicious, Flickr, Broadcast.com. Heck, they don't even provide their own search results anymore. Can anyone think of something that Yahoo has bought that has flourished under them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I'm a bit of a photography buff, a Flickr Pro user for years, and I'm not sure I want my photographs to be in the same place where I update friends and acquaintances about my status. It's an entirely different thing to me." Absolutely agree. I'm a hobbyist travel photographer, so I end up with essentially two kinds of photos: photos of a place, where I try and form a nice composition, post process (crop, colors, bal…
How can you possibly take 20,000 photos in a week? The math just doesn't work out, if you spent only 10 seconds composing a shot (and I'd argue it takes longer than that if you are a "photographer" and not a drive-by "snapshotter") that amounts to 8 hours per day of JUST picture taking, leaving no time to even move from location to location. Also, the average DSLR has a shutter life expectancy of around 100000-150000…
I usually shoot more like 10,000-15,000 in a week, but I've gone closer to 20,000 in a couple cases. It's only 1500 photos a day for a 10,000 shot week. Which averages just a bit over 1 a minute for an 8 hour day (but who says I only spend 8 hours out and about?) but in truth, the shot times are more clumpy. For example, I shot about 30 photos in 2 minutes of Vasari's fresco inside the Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore (the Duomo). I'll probably combine all those into one or two larger photos stitched up.
Differently, walking up to the same Basilica along a street in Florence offered several very different compositions of the same street. In 5 minutes I was able to shoot 20 pretty decent shots, and probably 1 or 2 really good ones.
That's 50 shots of the same building in a total of 7 minutes.
Riding on local public transport often gives you views of lots of neat things, and only one or two seconds to shoot them.
I'm not even counting the family photos I also took in the meantime.
And yes, I'll actually probably start looking for a replacement camera body sometime next year. I shoot with a D60, so it's only about $400-450...trivial compared to the cost of 5 or 6 2- week trips overseas.
My wife used to think I was crazy, but now years later, going over these old photo archives, we can remember in fantastic detail many of the great places we've traveled together.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I'm a bit of a photography buff, a Flickr Pro user for years, and I'm not sure I want my photographs to be in the same place where I update friends and acquaintances about my status. It's an entirely different thing to me." Absolutely agree. I'm a hobbyist travel photographer, so I end up with essentially two kinds of photos: photos of a place, where I try and form a nice composition, post process (crop, colors, bal…
Google+ makes it easy to share some items with some circles, and other items with other circles.
I'm not sure I can replicate that in g+.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Flickr is beyond irritating at times. I uploaded duplicate photos by mistake on Flickr and had to go through hundreds of photos one by one deleting them. There's no option to delete duplicates based on file name or file name/creation date etc. because Flickr has basically been dormant from a development standpoint for years.
Your need is very unique and it's something you only do once in a while. And yes, you can delete all the photo at the same time using organizer, or you can use the API to write your own delete method.
If you're using Flickr as an event display solution, it's quite easily done.
I have two pro accounts with Flickr, specifically so I can shoot and present events while still leaving breathing space for my general work. By and large I like it, but there are definite issues with bulk tools and this is one of them.
The whole photo-sharing space is ripe for a massive disruptor. Photographers and enthusiasts have been drifting away from Flickr for ages, but up until now there's been no offering that's really a suitable full replacement. On the one side you have sites like SmugMug, which has an awesome API, detailed controls over your images... but is devoid of any of the social features Flickr users have grown to love (and loathe…
They have tons of social network sharing & embed features. Plus a great API. Their categories and subcategories can act much like Flickr's groups but I simply think people don't use/browse them much.
The whole photo-sharing space is ripe for a massive disruptor. Photographers and enthusiasts have been drifting away from Flickr for ages, but up until now there's been no offering that's really a suitable full replacement. On the one side you have sites like SmugMug, which has an awesome API, detailed controls over your images... but is devoid of any of the social features Flickr users have grown to love (and loathe…
I've worked with SmugMug on some projects and I'd say they actually have fairly robust social/sharing features–they just may not be marketed well. They have tons of social network sharing & embed features. Plus a great API. Their categories and subcategories can act much like Flickr's groups but I simply think people don't use/browse them much.
I'm an amateur photographer, the work that I do is of interest to other photogs, rarely to my "real life" friends. Flickr's Groups, for all its faults, allow me to keep up with photographers of similar interests, and they with me - no amount of "Facebook/Twitter/StumbledUpon/+1" button integration will get you that sort of interaction.
There are really two sides to this that I can think of:
- Discoverability: can you discover the work of other people easily, and they yours? 500px has a wonderful way of measuring top uploads and exposing the best work to the world in a beautiful way. Flickr has groups where you can reach out and interact with photogs of similar interests. AFAIK SmugMug has very little in this regard.
- Interactivity: what can you do once you discover interesting, good work? On Flickr you can comment, you can add to group pools (to the collective groaning of everyone, but hey), you can fave, you can give all sorts of feedback. Similar for 500px. SmugMug is not nearly so tightly integrated in this way.
It's very much organized to be individuals of portfolios, there's not a distinct feeling that you're part of a greater network rather than simply looking at a single photographer's work.
Flickr may or may not be dead, but Google+ isn't going to replace it. The great thing about Flickr is the discovery. Flickr has a ton of tools that help you find other photographers (explore, tags, groups) and Google+ has none of these. Whereas Flickr enables and encourages users to seek out new contacts, it seems to me that the purpose of Google+ is to better facilitate communication between existing contacts. He do…
Flickr's search is actually quite robust and amazing. I frequently use the Creative Commons archives for my work as a writer. It's a fantastic resource.
Flickr might be dying, dead or stagnant, but I don't think that its replacement will be a slightly rehashed Picasa. Instead, I'm guessing it will be some sort of new network design that is able to surface photos from multiple sites and accounts and identities.