Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2018 17:04:08 GMT -5
Does anyone know of an inexpensive site host where I can just upload my photos, and post links to them as I wish? I feel time is shorter than anybody realizes to take action. Domain hosting sites give you the option of also putting up a web page or blog, as well as uploading and linking your files. Here is a recent review from PC Magazine (all are under $100 per year). |
|
|
|
Post by rockpickerforever on May 1, 2018 17:38:28 GMT -5
Thanks, @rocks2dust. That is just what I was looking for, and at about the price I imagined I would have to pay. Pretty much what I was thinking, put my photos on my own site where I have control of them and can link to them and not be subject to a photo hosting site's whims. I had HostGator before, did not like them for a conventional selling website, but maybe they would be okay just for parking my photos and linking to them. I don't need to pay extra for them to keep my website visible. I will have to look that information over.
It's funny how the hosting sites will tell you that you get a "free domain name" if you go with them. Big whoop! That is the cheap part, hosting and bandwidth are the expensive parts.
R2D, do you think there is a sense of urgency to getting this taken care of sooner, rather than later? Have you heard any scuttlebutt on how SmugMug will operate once photos have migrated there from Flickr? I'm not in the PC loop, lol. Thanks! Jean
|
|
|
|
Post by aDave on May 1, 2018 19:55:51 GMT -5
I am still trying to understand all the implications of this acquisition. From the SmugMug site, it is my understanding that a person has 30 days (from the time the first email from SmugMug was sent to them) to either A.) Do nothing, and their Flickr account and all their photos transfer to SmugMug, where they will then be subject to SmugMug rules and fees. Or B.) Take all of their photos off of Flickr, and close their account. Are those the only choices??? Flickr is totally going away? Or is SmugMug just wanting everyone to believe that, forcing us to turn all our photos over to them? If we do nothing and let the photos transfer to SmugMug, will they continue to host the photos currently on our Flickr accounts (albeit, maybe with a monthly fee?), keeping the same links? Will this be a repeat of what PB did to us, leaving broken links in their wake when they decided to hold us all hostage? Or do we basically consider this 30 days notice that we have to scramble to come up with an alternative? I had been (slowly) fixing broken PB links, but it seems now that is major waste of time. I've had a domain name forever, that is currently parked. Does anyone know of an inexpensive site host where I can just upload my photos, and post links to them as I wish? I feel time is shorter than anybody realizes to take action. Anybody else have any thoughts? Jean As of yet, and perhaps I'm being naive, I seen nothing yet from this acquisition of Flickr that has caused me too much concern. In the first article I read, which was posted here in another thread, there was a direct quote from one of the involved executives that Flickr will remain as it has, while working to improve user experience down the road. Currently, on the Flickr blog (which has some basic Q&A's), it is specifically mentioned that the "pro" subscription and the "free" membership will remain as we know it. Here are two links from Flickr. One is from the general blog article and the other is from the Q&A page. Take a look at them. Unless I've missed something entirely, I've not seen anything that is worrying me yet. Of course, time will tell. Blog Article
Acquisition Q&A |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller 
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,607
|
Post by jamesp on May 1, 2018 20:22:38 GMT -5
I just went ahead and got a $5.99/month account with SmugMug. Late notice for so many photos. After the Photobucket crap I'm not taking any chances. I never did understand the free hosting. Some articles say that a hosting site needs money beyond ads. They probably are not going to tell you the real facts. Perhaps they make a fortune on ads, no telling. aDave, I will call it a business expense because I use flickr heavily for it. rockpickerforever, As you well know I was always a fan of flickr. I was hoping this would not happen. Mud on my face I suppose. Nothing is written in stone anymore. Yahoo bought flickr in 2005, Verizon bought Yahoo in 2017. |
|
|
|
Post by Peruano on May 1, 2018 21:21:08 GMT -5
We used to presume that things we wrote or posted on the net were the same as things scratched in stone. not so we find. Yes if it something scandalous it will probably survive but otherwise you had better buy the rock and put a fence around it. Pay now or pay bigger in the future.... and hey it is convenient that we like rocks. At least one copy of the dead Sea scrolls exists. But what about James' most recent fire pit design?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pat on May 1, 2018 23:40:21 GMT -5
I only use Flickr so I can post photos on this RTH forum. All my photos that are on Flickr are also on my computer.
If they get pushy for payment, I can use Tommy's photo program that we have here. I just have to learn how t use it!
|
|
|
|
Post by aDave on May 2, 2018 0:58:56 GMT -5
I never did understand the free hosting. Some articles say that a hosting site needs money beyond ads. I'm only going to speculate about Flickr, as it's been the only 3rd party hosting service I've known. And, like Pat, I only started using it so I could post photos here. Like her, my photos are also on my computer, so any significant change is not a real threat to me. I digress.  As to Flickr, there are currently two platforms - "free" and "pro." Pro costs $50/year and offers quite a few more features than the free service...many features that would be used by folks who are more heavily into photography than the casual uploader (like me). Without knowing for sure, I'd have to imagine that a fair amount of "free" users may end up upgrading to the "pro" service after spending some time with Flickr, for varying reasons. Consider the free service as a gateway to getting more paid users. If Flickr (now Smugmug) eliminated the free service, that gateway no longer exists, and Flickr would solely have to rely on folks coming into its platform who are willing to spend money right off the bat to have photos hosted. Free hosting may simply exist as a "loss leader" with the hopes a free user may ultimately become a paying user. Of course, I obviously don't know, and I'm merely speculating. However, without any free service, I see the draw to Flickr being diminished, which hurts its chances for gaining (some) paid subscribers down the road. And, the loss of a free platform also effects the ad revenue, as paying members no longer see ads. It will certainly be interesting to see how this all pans out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 1:06:17 GMT -5
R2D, do you think there is a sense of urgency to getting this taken care of sooner, rather than later? Have you heard any scuttlebutt on how SmugMug will operate once photos have migrated there from Flickr? I've just heard speculation similar to what others have said here. Certainly, SmugMug will have to figure out how to make Flicker profitable enough to pay for the acquisition costs (plus they must have some firm ideas as to how they'll make the new customers produce enough income to make it a viable asset beyond paying off the cost of buying them from Verizon). That was the downfall of Photobucket's various changes of ownership, so I think the recollection of that downhill spiral (starting out with a decent platform, then introducing a paid option, then making things more difficult for free users, then plastering ads all over the site to make it nearly unusable, then requiring a big payment for hot-linking on forums, etc.) is what has many worried. |
|
|
|
Post by fernwood on May 2, 2018 4:49:12 GMT -5
I just checked the FAQ's section. Here is what it says:
Will Flickr continue to offer a free version? Will Flickr’s price change?
Absolutely. Flickr’s free accounts are foundational to its community of influential and engaged photographers. We are not making any changes to Flickr plans or rates at this time. We’ll let Flickr Pro customers know if that changes.
I have all of my photos elsewhere as well and just use Flickr for 3rd party hosting.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,607
|
Post by jamesp on May 2, 2018 5:05:53 GMT -5
Tis a big deal for me. Photos are all on back up disc or computer but are organized for communicating on flickr.
Time is invested in the organization.
Yesterday an RTH member asked about a tumbler barrel design.
Boom, sent him a link of 46 photos "HDPE tumbler barrel construction".
Saved a lot of time and gave him a clear idea of what is involved.
What other types of fire pit designs do you make ?
Boom, send them a link of 600 photos of custom mades and experimental designs.
Let them scroll thru the photos and make up their mind.
CRS getting worse with age and photo albums have become critical memory help.
Hosting sites are easy to load/send photos anywhere you have a signal via links.
Most make photo organization easy. Most make attractive presentations to clients and others.
Unlike Photobucket, flickr and seemingly Smugmug appear to be ad free professional sites.
flickr has had the power to demand $71 a year from me for years now. I would have thought nothing of the request. Nada
Let the Photobucket fiasco be a lesson. Forums, businesses, sentimental photos, etc, many sustained great damage from that event.
No doubt, these hosting sites own you to a degree if you have placed a dependence on them.
No different than IP's, social forums, search engines and the like.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,607
|
Post by jamesp on May 2, 2018 5:29:13 GMT -5
Emailed photo links easily from Smugmug. A start.
|
|
