Flickr or ???

Started Jul 12, 2012 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Hans vdC
Hans vdC Veteran Member • Posts: 3,012
Flickr or ???

Hi

My account on flickr has expired and I'm not quite sure I should get another year subscription, of look for a different service. I'm not dissatisfied with Flickr but their interface feels a bit dated.

Is Flickr still best? Or are there better alternatives?

 Hans vdC's gear list:Hans vdC's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a6000 Nikon D750 Sony Alpha a6300 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR +5 more
Supr X
Supr X Veteran Member • Posts: 4,956
Re: Flickr -never again

Hans von der Crone wrote:

Hi

My account on flickr has expired and I'm not quite sure I should get another year subscription, of look for a different service. I'm not dissatisfied with Flickr but their interface feels a bit dated.

Is Flickr still best? Or are there better alternatives?

I had a 'Pro' Flickr account and through an email screw-up they killed my paid account, now i can't upload full-sized images anymore. I corresponded with them for a while and they ended up telling me 'tough luck'.
I don't visit their site anymore(but i am leaving all my cr*p there).
--
David~
WSSA Member #90

. . . shoot like there's no film in the thing!

Player9 Senior Member • Posts: 1,099
Re: Flickr or ???

There are other alternatives but, for the fairly low annual price of the "pro" account, Flickr is probably still the best bet for those who can live with the seriously outdated interface.

bronxbombers Forum Pro • Posts: 18,226
Re: Flickr or ???

Hans von der Crone wrote:

Hi

My account on flickr has expired and I'm not quite sure I should get another year subscription, of look for a different service. I'm not dissatisfied with Flickr but their interface feels a bit dated.

Is Flickr still best? Or are there better alternatives?

I like that they allow you to use wide-gamut when you want to and they have lots of nice bulk change tools.

digitalshooter
digitalshooter Forum Pro • Posts: 19,604
stay away from Fotki (nt)
-- hide signature --

Thanks,

Digitalshooter

PS: all posts are just my opinion!

 digitalshooter's gear list:digitalshooter's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Canon Pixma Pro9000 Mark II
CAcreeks
CAcreeks Veteran Member • Posts: 9,375
How about Dropbox?

Hans von der Crone wrote:

My account on flickr has expired and I'm not quite sure I should get another year subscription...

I really hate viewing images on Flickr because I have to click multiple times to see the original with EXIF, if it is even there. Viewing small images is no fun on a 1920x1080 monitor.

Dropbox stores your originals and has an excellent slideshow interface. I like it!

Robert Edie Junior Member • Posts: 27
Re: Flickr or ???

Have you looked at Mejuba? It's free and unlimited.

http://www.mejuba.com/

Rob

Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 11,766
Re: How about Dropbox?

CAcreeks wrote:

I really hate viewing images on Flickr because I have to click multiple times to see the original with EXIF, if it is even there. Viewing small images is no fun on a 1920x1080 monitor.

Try Fluidr for viewing photos on flickr.

http://www.fluidr.com

Thank you
Russell

QuicksilverCA Contributing Member • Posts: 543
Re: Flickr or ???

You can try Google Picasa, pretty easy to use, simple interface.

AxelR Senior Member • Posts: 1,158
Re: Flickr or ???

Robert Edie wrote:

It's free and unlimited.

How far can any business go that way?

-- hide signature --
Andres Regular Member • Posts: 411
Re: Flickr or ???

Zenfolio...love Zenfolio
http://www.zenfolio.com

allows you to create galleries and password protect them if you would like, sharing, and you can even allow you friends, family or customers but prints from their system...

If you need a referall code let me know!

Andres
--
Andres
All you need is trust and a little bit of pixie dust!

bronxbombers Forum Pro • Posts: 18,226
Re: Flickr or ???

one thing is they disallow anything but sRGB images (As does Smugmug)

Andres wrote:

Zenfolio...love Zenfolio
http://www.zenfolio.com

allows you to create galleries and password protect them if you would like, sharing, and you can even allow you friends, family or customers but prints from their system...

If you need a referall code let me know!

Andres
--
Andres
All you need is trust and a little bit of pixie dust!

Blue Guitarist Regular Member • Posts: 401
Re: Flickr or ???

I got a basic account with SmugMug a couple of years ago. It has worked out nicely and has plenty of room to "grow" if I get more serious about dressing up and maintaining my site.

 Blue Guitarist's gear list:Blue Guitarist's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D7200 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD
CSMR Contributing Member • Posts: 506
Re: Flickr or ???

Zenfolio stores the original file, and you can download it, with the original profile, but converts to sRGB for web display - as it should do given the current state of the web.

bronxbombers Forum Pro • Posts: 18,226
Re: Flickr or ???

CSMR wrote:

Zenfolio stores the original file, and you can download it, with the original profile, but converts to sRGB for web display - as it should do given the current state of the web.

Not as it should since sometimes you want to be able to share wide gamut images with people. In this day and age there is no reason to be denied the option. Firefox handles it all perfectly. Safari mostly does. IE9 won't let you take advantage of wide gamut but it will make the images look normal on a regular monitor. Google Chrome is the only current browser that will make a total muddle of it.

It's tiresome to never get to be able to see other people's work in wide gamut with the likes of Smugmug and Zenfolio insisting that they know better in all cases. No they do not. They may as well start converting some images to B&W only if they decided some are best seen in B&W.

CSMR Contributing Member • Posts: 506
Re: Flickr or ???

They don't employ people to actively deny you from doing this. They just did not do the work to implement the feature, with the structural work and user interface elements involved.

It's fairly rare for this to be a good idea, as just as you say, the users need to be using the right browsers. So the market for the feature is small. People understand that you should covert to sRGB for upload to web.

In the future, when the main browsers get better, then it will be time to post non-sRGB images. But it may take several years as web technology moves very very slowly and not many people are interested in the idea of correctness. I am all for color management and 16 bit image formats of course, but you have to accept the current state of the web.

I am not sure what they do for printing and image download, but there things ought to be better as they can work from the original file and color space. But I haven't checked what they actually do.

bronxbombers wrote:

Not as it should since sometimes you want to be able to share wide gamut images with people. In this day and age there is no reason to be denied the option. Firefox handles it all perfectly. Safari mostly does. IE9 won't let you take advantage of wide gamut but it will make the images look normal on a regular monitor. Google Chrome is the only current browser that will make a total muddle of it.

It's tiresome to never get to be able to see other people's work in wide gamut with the likes of Smugmug and Zenfolio insisting that they know better in all cases. No they do not. They may as well start converting some images to B&W only if they decided some are best seen in B&W.

bronxbombers Forum Pro • Posts: 18,226
Re: Flickr or ???

It wouldn't be so hard to put a toggle button to turn off the conversion to sRGB would it? I mean it's not like it's doing more work it's doing less and saving processing time on their end every time someone turns off the code. Smugmug, at least, already has plenty of other toggles and buttons (not sure about Zen).

And Smugmug, at least, sure makes a point, about strictly forcing conversion with no plans to allow the user to be able to turn it off no matter how much they may want to for certain images or galleries.

Anyway I switched to Flickr. At least they don't insist they know better and they let you do what you want. (granted as a pro sales base, the configuration on flickr wouldn't be so hot but for sharing it's ok)

CSMR wrote:

They don't employ people to actively deny you from doing this. They just did not do the work to implement the feature, with the structural work and user interface elements involved.

It's fairly rare for this to be a good idea, as just as you say, the users need to be using the right browsers. So the market for the feature is small. People understand that you should covert to sRGB for upload to web.

In the future, when the main browsers get better, then it will be time to post non-sRGB images. But it may take several years as web technology moves very very slowly and not many people are interested in the idea of correctness. I am all for color management and 16 bit image formats of course, but you have to accept the current state of the web.

I am not sure what they do for printing and image download, but there things ought to be better as they can work from the original file and color space. But I haven't checked what they actually do.

bronxbombers wrote:

Not as it should since sometimes you want to be able to share wide gamut images with people. In this day and age there is no reason to be denied the option. Firefox handles it all perfectly. Safari mostly does. IE9 won't let you take advantage of wide gamut but it will make the images look normal on a regular monitor. Google Chrome is the only current browser that will make a total muddle of it.

It's tiresome to never get to be able to see other people's work in wide gamut with the likes of Smugmug and Zenfolio insisting that they know better in all cases. No they do not. They may as well start converting some images to B&W only if they decided some are best seen in B&W.

Pictus
Pictus Veteran Member • Posts: 5,735
Re: Flickr or ???

I do not know, but maybe http://1x.com/ or http://500px.com/

QuicksilverCA Contributing Member • Posts: 543
Re: Flickr or ???

Never heard of these two but they look interesting.

CSMR Contributing Member • Posts: 506
Re: Flickr or ???

bronxbombers wrote:

It wouldn't be so hard to put a toggle button to turn off the conversion to sRGB would it? I mean it's not like it's doing more work it's doing less and saving processing time on their end every time someone turns off the code. Smugmug, at least, already has plenty of other toggles and buttons (not sure about Zen).

There is a difference between implementing a feature and implementing it properly. To do this properly they would need: display of color space and options to convert later, warnings on the viewer end for users using the wrong browsers, and options on the admin end for whether and how such a warning should be displayed. Ideally they should also accept a 16bit image format to work well with wider color spaces.

Anyway I switched to Flickr. At least they don't insist they know better and they let you do what you want. (granted as a pro sales base, the configuration on flickr wouldn't be so hot but for sharing it's ok)

Main substantial differences:

Flickr excels in the social part, a lot of people viewing and commenting on the site. However the presentation is dreadful.

Zenfolio looks great, and great in many different ways with easy customization. However the social part is non-existent.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads